TheG 



War 



e uerman 
and Catholicism 



German Defense Against 
French Attacks 



AUTHORIZED AMERICAN EDITION 

ST. PAUL. MINN., 1916 
WANDERER PRINTING COMPANY 



The GermanWar 
and Catholicism 



German Defense Against 
French Attacks 



AUTHORIZED AMERICAN EDITION 

ST. PAUL, MINN., 1916 
WANDERER PRINTING COMPANY 









v-* 1 







i 



Foreword to the American Edition. 

Since the outbreak of the World War, a campaign of calumny against 
Germany, the Germans, and the German-Americans has been carried on In 
our country. It was one of the first war measures of England to cut the 
German-American cable, in order to facilitate that campaign. Although 
wireless messages and communication by mail since, made it possible to 
some extent to counteract this pernicious activity, truth did not get an impar- 
tial hearing to this day. 

It was particularly painful to us Catholics that the events of war 
in Belgium and France carried the political conflict into the realm of re- 
ligion and were conducive in arraying Catholic sympathies on the side of 
one of the groups of belligerents. Thus an issue was raised of which no 
one could have thought at the beginning of the conflagration. Catholic 
affairs and countries never stood very high in the estimation of our modern 
society, and our public press never before was aroused by injury and injus- 
tice suffered by the Catholics in any country. On the contrary: the war of 
oppression waged by the French Republic against the Church was excused, 
nay, even extolled as justified by reason and the desire to free the country 
from an unbearable yoke; in Belgium the radical opponents of the Govern- 
ment up to the time of the war were in favor with the international press; 
Catholic Spain was denounced and bitterly assailed because she had con- 
demned to death the atheistic revolutionary, Francisco Ferrer; we failed to 
notice any excitement when Ernesto Nathan fiercely attacked the Holy Father 
and reviled the Catholics as stupid buffoons and their religion as superstitious 
idiocy; the terrible fate of the Catholic Church in Mexico did not cause 
much indignation and even was hailed as the beginning of a new era; the 
persecution of the Catholics in Galicia perpetrated by Russia did not receive 
more than a passing notice. 

Richard Harding Davis and other correspondents siding with the Allies 
had hardly sent their gruesome tales of the "complete destruction" of 
Louvain and the bombardment of the Cathedral of Reims, when all of a sud- 
den the public press, which to a great extent is responsible for the isolation of 
the Church in its trials and tribulations, discovered its sense of justice to- 
wards the Church and showed an interest in Catholic affairs never before 
exhibited. In numberless press reports, speeches and pamphlets the cause of 
poor Catholic Belgium was espoused; Belgian politicians, who formerly never 
enjoyed popularity, on account of their affiliation with a Catholic party, were 
extolled as eminent statesmen; hundreds and thousands detected their in- 
finite admiration of the treasures of art produced by a Catholic past which 
in accordance with the principles of modern thought long since had been 
stigmatized as "the dark ages." 

And whence that wonderful change? England had given the cue; Eng- 
land which, like no other country, has succeeded in making the international 
press serve her purposes; England, where the No-Popery-cry has never been 
silenced, found it to her advantage to make Catholicism subservient to her 
as an important factor in influencing public opinion in the neutral countries. 

That was comprehensible from England's political point of view and in 
the light of England's political dishonesty in the past which was particu- 
larly manifested but a few years ago in her campaign against the very same 

3 



Belgium in the Congo question. But more surprising developments en- 
sued. The Catholics in Belgium and France were carried away by 
the current of events, and were persuaded into the absurd notion that the 
blow at their countries was more of religious, than political significance. The 
origin of this idea will remain a matter of conjecture: whether it has its 
source in exaggerated national sentiments carried to morbid extremes by 
the terrors of war, or whether it is to be attributed, to some extent at least, 
to the psychological influence of the British press campaign is difficult to say. 

As long as the world will judge by material achievements it is indeed 
a fact that the political enfeeblement of a nation carries with it a 
loss to the prestige of the religious convictions professed by the majority 
of that nation. But it is another thing to assert that defeat and even 
oppression is bound to strike a blow at the faith and the morals and the re- 
ligious strength of a nation. It appears to U3 that such an assertion is 
refuted by the history of the Irish and Polish nations, not to mention other 
historical facts. From this point of view alone, we never could understand — 
even taking in consideration the excitedness and passions caused by the 
war — how any Catholic could be persuaded to believe that the future of 
Catholicism is at stake in this war. In looking over the two groups of bel- 
ligerents at the beginning of the war, we are still more at a loss to follow 
the argument that a terrible conflict is being waged between Christ and 
Antichrist; that paganism has set out to subdue Catholicism and rob the 
nations of the globe of all the blessings Christianity has bestowed upon 
them. There are arrayed on the one hand the German Empire and Austria- 
Hungary: the German Empire with its 25 million Catholics and its marvelous 
Catholic activities which but a few years ago caused His Eminence Cardinal 
Ferrari to speak of the example Catholic Germany is setting for all 
other nations ("Germania docet"); and Austria-Hungary with her millions 
of devoted sons of the Church. And while the Germanic Powers are made 
to appear as the bitterest enemies of the Church, their adversaries are 
lauded as protectors and defenders of Catholicism: England, where but a 
few years ago the king was forced to defame the tenets of the Church in 
the coronation oath; France, whose government waged a fierce war against 
the Church and even in the midst of the present calamity betrays its enmity 
thereto; Russia, the exponent of petrified and State ruled Orthodoxy; Serbia 
and Montenegro, where the Church for centuries has been oppressed; Japan, 
whose aspirations to conform to modern thought led to a vague eclecticism. 
These are the champions of Christianity, these the protectors of the Catholic 
Church! The idea is so absurd that at first one is inclined to pass it 
unnoticed. 

But the charges against Germany were repeated again and again and 
the grand mission of the Triple Entente to preserve Christian culture, was 
emphasized until not a few began to accept these theses as proven facts. 
For years, so we were assured by Germany's adversaries, the Germans have 
prepared this offensive war, not only for political purposes, but with the 
principal object in view to strike a decisive blow at Christian culture. 
Christianity has conquered Graeco-Roman culture and permeated it with the 
principles and ideals of its divine revelations and teachings and thus led 
humanity to the lofty heights of Christian culture. Then, the Germanic na- 
tions were instruments in the hands of Providence. But having proceeded 
from Lutheranism to rationalism, and then to nationalism, and now to neo- 
paganism, Germany of today, inflated with pride and arrogance, is about to 
overthrow Christian culture and force her own world view upon the nations. 
While Austria is merely Germany's vassal, German neo-paganism girded 
with the armature of Prussian militarism, sweeps like a hurricane through 
the Catholic neighboring countries to strike at the very heart of Christianity. 
The Powers arrayed against Germany, therefore, wage a Kulturkampf, a 
battle for culture in the true sense of the word, and whoever has at heart 
the preservation of the Christian religion with all its cultural achievements 
is in duty bound to take sides with them and to help foil Germany's base 
attempt. 



We might call attention to the fact that French and Italian Free- 
masons also try to influence the neutrals against Germany, and it goes 
without saying that they present altogether different reasons why Germany's 
intentions should be crushed. But we are concerned principally with the 
propaganda among our co-religionists and confine ourselves to this side of 
the propaganda. 

That propaganda reached its culmination when in France a committee 
of Catholics was formed for the purpose to create sentiments in favor of 
France and her allies. (Comite" Catholique de propagande francaise). This 
committee began its activity by publishing a pamphlet, under the title 
"La guerre allemande et le catholicisme." To ward off the attacks of this 
committee and to defend themselves against the accusations contained in 
the above book, the German Catholics formed a similar committee which 
some months ago published a reply to the French indictment. ("Der 
deutsche Krieg und der Katholizismus. Deutsche Abwehr franzosiseher 
Angriffe." Herausgegeben von deutschen Katholiken. Berlin, 1915. Verlag 
und Druck der Germania, Aktien-Gesellschaft fur Verlag und Druckerei. 
M. 3.20.) We herewith submit to our American co-religionists an authorized 
English edition of this book trusting with Mr. Arthur Preuss that "those 
who have read the French charges will want to read the German answer." 
("Fortnightly Review," Nov. 1, 1915.) 

Even Catholic Frenchmen criticised the French publication. The well- 
known scholar, Dom. G. Morin, of the Belgian Benedictine Abbey Maredsous, 
a Frenchman by birth, in commenting on the book speaks of "the sadness 
and disgust which that pamphlet aroused in him as a Catholic and not less 
as a Frenchman." (Quoted in the N. Allg. Ztg., August 3, 1915). He was 
followed by Fr. de la Briere, S. J., who, although he found much to praise, 
dared to point out a number of faults and mistakes in the book, coating 
his censure with the pacifying remarks: "The book came into existence 
with amazing haste in the heat of battle. That alone goes to show that the 
very excellent authors do not pretend that their work possesses the perfec- 
tion which could have been attained in the repose of better times . . ." 
("Etudes," May, 1915, Cf. the German Jesuit Review, "Stimmen der Zeit," 
vol. 45, 11.) The opinion of the French politician, Denys Cochin, a member 
of that very same committee, also deserves attention. "Whence the bad 
repute of the French Catholics of which the authors of the book try to 
clear us?" he asks. "The anti-clerical policy has caused it." "But," he 
continues, "what is the cause of this policy? Is this policy compatible with 
a serious sentiment entertained by the majority of Frenchmen? I deny that 
absolutely." In attempting to prove this hazardous assertion, M. Cochin 
reckons with the passiveness of his compatriots and his utterances against 
his will become satirical; for in view of the glorious victory of the Catholics 
in Germany over the most powerful statesman in his day on the one hand, 
and the ignominious defeat suffered by the French Catholics at the hands 
of a comparatively small clique of Freemasons on the other, one fails to 
grasp the force of Mr. Cochin's argument, who compares the purely religious 
Catholicism in France with Catholicism in Germany and rejoices because 
France shall never have a party similar to the German Centre. ("II n'y 
aura jamais de parti catholique en France, non, rien qui ressemble au 
Centre allemand." Revue des Deux Mondes, May 1, 1915.) 

Catholic papers in the United States, too, reviewed the French book. 
it was especially surprising to us that one of them (an esteemed weekly 
magazine in Indiana), which tries to be fair and impartial recommended 
it to its readers. One of our oldest Catholic papers, the "Freeman's Journal" 
cf New York, took the French Catholics severely to task for making the 
Church and the Holy Father appear to take sides with France and said in 
a lengthy editorial dealing with the French book: "Every true Catholic, 
whatever his nationality, will feel indignant at suc.i a charge." ("Freeman's 
Journal," October 15, 1915.) 



The German Catholic papers in our country unanimously regretted that 
the French book was translated and published in English. And the fact 
that it is being sent out broadcast by the consulates of the French Republic 
(Cf. daily "Amerika," St. Louis, Dec. 20, 1915), added another insult to the 
harm the book is apt to bring about by furthering national hatred even 
in this country and within the Catholic Church in America. Not to speak 
of love and charity which should reign supreme within the fold, we Amer- 
ican Catholics cannot afford to foment disharmony and strife in our own 
ranks, surrounded as we are by relentless enemies (Guardians of Liberty, 
Knights of Luther, etc.), who justly may rejoice seeing Catholics set against 
Catholics. In spite of misunderstandings and controversies that arose from 
time to time, the Church in America may be proud of the fact that its 
children of different nationalities in chivalrous rivalry labored for the exten- 
sion of God's kingdom on earth. We German-American Catholics may appeal 
to the members of the Hierarchy and to the representatives of the Holy 
Father himself, to give testimony whether we have done our share towards 
the development and strengthening of Catholic life and activity. Time and 
again, in public speeches and written testimonials, we received hearty 
praise and encouragement. We do not boast of our deeds. Neither do we 
hesitate to state, that what we were able to accomplish, has been accom- 
plished through those very same characteristics which in more just and 
less turbulent days were ascribed to the German people at large and to the 
Catholics in Germany in particular, and that it has been accomplished, be- 
cause we followed the example and gained by the experience of our fellow- 
Catholics in the Fatherland. 

And now everything German is being derided, and to our astonishment, 
we are informed of the depraved and dismal forces that are hidden under 
the surface of German nafure, and of the barbarous instincts that govern 
German thought and action. And these insinuations and charges are hurled 
at us in a book which pretends to serve the Catholic cause, and for the 
English edition of which the infidel French government stands sponsor, so to 
speak. 

Who will blame us for protesting against such abuse? As far as the 
political questions are concerned, we leave it to the Catholics in Germany 
themselves to defend their cause. No one will deny them the right to 
give their side and to ward off attacks.* In view of an outraged public 
opinion we deem it our Christian duty to assist them in this undertaking — 
unless the old juridical principle: "Audiatur et altera pars" does not hold 
good any more in this era of "the new liberty." 

But the French charges are not only of a political character: they try 
to use the Catholic religion as a political weapon. The French committee 
accuses the Catholics in Germany of professing a Catholicity out of har- 
mony with the teachings of the Church, and tries to assign to the Catholics 
in France a singular position within the Church, which no nation and no 
nationality can assume. The French committee aims at making an object 
of hatred and contempt everything that has any connection with the intel- 
lectual life in Germany, and at transplanting that hatred from the Old World 
into the New. 

And against such action we protest, feeling as we do that the defama- 
tion of the religious aspirations of the Catholics in Germany is also a 
defamation of the religious endeavors of the German-American Catholics. 

Far be it from us to deny that the name of France is written conspicu- 
ously upon many pages of the history of the Church, and that French Cath- 
olics have rendered great services to the Church in our own country. It is 



*The English, however, apparently are very anxious to deprive them of this opportunity. 
The copy of the German book sent to us, as well as several cablegrams and letters pertaining 
to the publishing of the English edition, were confiscated. At least they never reached their 
destination. And it may not be amiss to add that we did not correspond with aD.v official 
bureau or any Government official whatever, this book being published with the consent and 
authority of the Committee of German Catholics only. — Jos. Matt, Editor. 

6 



therefore with regret that we denounce their most deplorable literary war- 
fare against their German co-religionists. That action becomes the more 
lamentable since it is carried into neutral countries and especially into the 
United States with its manifold nationalities. Their book "La guerre alle- 
mande," in the opinion of Bishop Faulhaber, "will remain one of the most 
deplorable documents in the history of the Church of the 20th century," 
(Deutsche Kultur, Katholizismus and Weltkrieg, p. 452. — An American edi- 
tion of this book is to appear within a short time.) and the fact that it is 
distributed in our country by the official representatives of the French 
Republic, does not tend to make the guilt of our French brethren appear in 
a better light. We again protest against this procedure and shall continue 
to take measures against It. 

Joseph Matt, 

Editor Der Wanderer; Pres. Wanderer Printing Co., 

St. Paul, Minnesota. 

F. P. Kenkel, 

K. St. G., Editor Amerika; Director Central Bureau of the G. R. C. 

Central Verein of North America, St. Louis, Missouri. 

Msgr. P. M. Abbelen, Milwaukee. Wisconsin. 

Henry A. J. Andries, Editor Stimme der Wahrheit, Detroit, Michigan. 

Msgr. George Bo me ma nn, V. F., P. R., Rector St. Paul's Church, Reading, 
Pennsylvania. 

Dr. C. Bruehl, Professor St. Charles Seminary, Overbrook, Pennsylvania. 

Joseph Frey, K. St. G., Manufacturer; President German Roman Catholic 
Central Verein of North America; Vice-Pres. American Federation of 
Catholic Societies, New York City. 

Nicholas Gonner, K. St. G., Editor and Publisher The Catholic Tribune, Der 
Katholische Westen, and Luxemburger Gazette; Honorary President G. 
R. C. Central Verein of North America; Member Exec. Board American 
Federation of Catholic Societies, Dubuque, Iowa. 

Msgr. George W. Heer, Prot. Apost, Rector St. Mary's Church. Dubuque, 
Iowa. 

Martin A. Hiesemann, Editor Buff. Volksfreund. Buffalo, New York. 

Msgr. Paul Hoelscher, D. D., Rector St. Louis Church. Buffalo, New York. 

F. G. Holweck, Rector St. Francis de Sales Church. St. Louis, Missouri. 

F. W. Immecus, Merchant; Treas. G. R. C. Central Verein of North America; 
Member Exec. Board American Federation of Catholic Societies. Pitts- 
burgh, Pennsylvania. 

John Q. Juenemann, Secretary G. R. C. Central Verein of North America; 
Secretary G. R. C. Aid Society of Minnesota. St. Paul, Minnesota. 

(Rev.) Charles Jung, Editor Ohio Waisenfreund. Columbus, Ohio. 

Charles Korz, Ret., President State League of German Cath. Societies of 
New York. Brooklyn, New York. 

Dr. Peter J. Latz. Chicago, Illinois. 

Msgr. C. Linnenkamp, V. G., Rector Immaculate Conception Church, St. 
Joseph, Missouri. 

F. Markert, S. V. D., Editor Amerikanisches Familienblatt. Techny, Illi- 
nois. 

Celestine Miller, O. S. B., Editor St. Joseph's Blatt. Mt. Angel, Oregon. 

Dr. Joseph Och, Editor Josephinum Weekly. Columbus, Ohio. 



Msgr. John H. Oechtering, V. G., Rector St. Mary's Church, Fort Wayne, 
Indiana. 

John B. Oelkers, K. St. G., Manufacturer; Honorary President G. R. C. Cen- 
tral Verein of North America. Newark, New Jersey. 

George F. Roesch, Counselor at Law; Former Justice of the District Court. 
New York City. 

Msgr. B. Rlchter, Rector St. Boniface's Church. Melrose, Minnesota. 

Mathias Rohr, Retired Journalist and Publisher; Ditto, Manager Life Ins. 
Buffalo, New York. 

Msgr. Joseph Ruesing, V. F. Dean, Rector em. of St. Mary's Church. West 
Point, Nebraska. 

Joseph Schaefer, Publisher and Importer. New York City. 

F. X. Schifferli, Editor Aurora und Christlicbe Woche. Buffalo, New York. 

Msgr. B. Schmiehausen, V. G., Rector St. Joseph's Church. Andale, Kansas. 

Francis M. Schirp, Ph. D., Prof. Regis High School. New York City. 

J. M. A. Schulthels, Former Editor Excelsior. Milwaukee, Wisconsin. 

Justus Schweizer, O. S. B., Author and Journalist. St. Mary's Abbey, Rich- 
ardton, North Dakota. 

Henry Seyfried, Attorney at Law; Pres. State League of German Cath. Soci- 
eties of Indiana, Indianapolis, Indiana. 

Msgr. Dr. Joseph Soentgerath, Rector Pontifical College Josephinum. Colum- 
bus, Ohio. 

Henry Tappert, Rector Church Mother of God. Covington, Kentucky. 

Msgr. A. J. Thiele, V. G., Rector St. Aloysius Church. Chicago, Illinois. 

Adolph Weber, Retired Manufacturer; Honorary President G. R. C. Central 
Verein of North America. Racine, Wisconsin. 

Msgr. Max Wurst, Rector St. Felix Church. Wabasha, Minnesota. 

Charles A. Zenkert, Editor The Echo. Buffalo, New York. 



A. 



MEMORIAL 

of German Catholics against the 
French Publication: 

"La Guerre allemande et le Catholicisme." 



MEMORIAL 



Of German Catholics Against the French Publication: "La Guerre 
Allemande et le Catholicisme." 




HE awful havoc wrought by the terrible World War 
fills every feeling heart with extreme sadness. Not only 
those that suffered defeat moan and lament, but even the 
victor's joy and jubilation is mingled with pangs of mourn- 
ing over all the misery inseparable from war's triumphs 
and glories. 

At all times, the Christian religion has endeavored 
to assuage human distress in its various forms, especially 
the miseries of war. Our Holy Father, the Pope, never 
tires of finding new ways and means of healing the wounds which war has 
inflicted. Above all, he preaches the great fundamental law of Christianity: 
love of God and of our neighbors. Touching are the supplications in his 
prayer for peace: "0 God! inspire the nations and their rulers with 
thoughts of peace that the strife may soon cease which sets one nation 
against the other, and that love may re-bind torn mankind. Remember 
that Thou hast redeemed men with Thy precious blood and hast made them 
brothers." 

Thus the Pope prays to Jesus Christ, our Saviour and Redeemer, so 
that a storm-tossed and passion-swept world may be restored to rest and 
peace, and Catholics all over the world join him in prayer. 

It is most painful to us German Catholics that our co-religionists in 
hostile lands should turn a deaf ear to love and conciliation, and preach grim 
hatred. We are astounded to learn that even bishops take offense at the 
Papal prayer which all German Catholics gladly welcomed, and in which 
they faithfully participated. In France, by affected interpretation, the 
prayer's Catholic meaning has been distorted to make it correspond with 
national ideas and ambitions, and only in this form it has been accepted. 
But more surprises were in store for us. A "Catholic Committee for 
Carrying on French Propaganda Abroad" was formed in France. Its first 
undertaking was a book entitled: "The German War and Catholicism." 
Simultaneously with this book "Album No. 1." was published, bearing the 
same title. It claims to contain "photographic documents illustrating the 
attitude of the French and German armies towards the Catholic Church." 
Book and album are to appear In six languages; the French edition already 
has been published. 

Neither book nor album serve the cause of conciliation, peace and 
Catholicism. National passion has stirred the flames of a fierce and con- 
suming hatred. Our German Fatherland is represented as the arch-fiend 
of religion and of the Catholic Church; France, on the other hand, as their 
enthusiastic advocate. 

National passion has led to a violation of truth and justice. National 
passion imputes to Germany a conception of war and culture, which we 
do not hold, which we reject. National passion reproaches Germany with 
crimes and atrocities which are nowise proven, and adduces witnesses who 
are allowed to give evidence only as accusers. National passion denounces 
as atrocities what is merely justified self-defense against franctireurs 
("Freischaerler," "snipers"), and in unjustifiable manner generalizes 
from isolated cases. In all this the mad desire is to strike blow after 



11 



blow at the hated opponent, to fill the imagination of nations with grue- 
some and blood-stained pictures, and their hearts with hatred. 

It is especially painful to us German Catholics that national hatred 
is particularly intense among those French Catholics who, by education 
and position, should be safeguarded against being carried away by blind 
instinct in their patriotic sentiments. We regret that even Princes of the 
Church have lent their sanction and authority to these assaults which — 
we can find no other words to characterize them adequately — are dictated 
by passionate hatred. 

The Catholic Church condemns hatred even of unjust oppressors. Far 
less justified is hatred against a military enemy who, only by compulsion, 
has taken up his sword to fight for his national existence amidst a world 
of foes, and not for the sake of unjustly oppressing other nations. Doubly 
un-Christian it is not only to entertain personal hatred against such 
an opponent, but to fill even those who are not concerned with hatred against 
him. 

We therefore solemnly protest against the charge of barbarism made 
against our soldiers and our whole nation. We are witnessing a moral and 
religious uplifting of our whole people. Our Emperor set a good example 
when he finished his speech on July 31st, 1914, with the words: "And now 
I commend you all to the mercy of Almighty God. Go to church, kneel 
down before Him, and implore His help for our brave army." With these 
words the Emperor touched the right chord in German hearts. The entire 
nation felt one with him who in the hour of greatest need had turned to God 
even as the nation itself was ready and willing to invoke Divine assistance. 

Like an elementary force a new religious spring (neuer religioeser 
Yolksfruehling ) burst forth all over Germany and revealed the nation's 
profound religious strength. Old and young were touched to the quick 
and in a devout mood they gathered in thousands of churches and implored 
God's help in the war which had been maliciously forced on the Father- 
land, and which had been prepared, with falsehood and intrigue, by hostile 
Governments for many a year. Genuine and pious was the devotion of 
millions of Catholic soldiers who flocked to the sacraments before they 
marched out to battle. In countless parishes there was hardly a man that 
stayed behind. We have the testimony of the German field-clergy that the 
religious zeal of nearly all of our soldiers has not been paralyzed during 
the dangers and hardships of the gigantic fight. Such warriors cannot be 
capable of the abominations with which they are charged. 

Even those who know the moral and religious strength of our people 
only superficially, and who have witnessed the heroic courage and Christian 
readiness for sacrifice with which our young men march to the battlefield, 
cannot conceive of the monstrous notion that "barbarism" can possibly 
have a home in the German rank and file. Grossest and unpardonable 
ignorance of the German people has produced the whole of the French indict- 
ment. Hence it is our duty as Catholics and Germans to examine the con- 
tents of the two publications according to the universal standard of truth. We 
shall deal only with the leading ideas and main arguments, being concerned 
with those charges only that are preferred against the German nation and 
army in their entirety. With our reply we entrusted a man who 
through his intimate knowledge of the affairs to be considered is entitled 
to a hearing, who, moreover, is free from all prejudice against France, and 
who undertakes his task guided by the principles of truth and the methods 
of scientific research. Every reader who does not take sides from the 
outset will soon feel convinced that Germany is not the land of barbarians 
which the French book and album represent her to be. Thus we hope to 
do a service to truth and international good-will at the same time. 

In order to repel old and new attacks, and any that may be made in 
the future, a permanent committee has been formed by German Catholics 
who hold a place in public life, and whose reputation is sufficient guarantee 
that an adequate and truthful defense will be carried on. Within a very 
short time it will issue a second publication of defense against the attacks 
that have been made. 

12 



Unlike their French co-religionists, the undersigned Committee of Ger- 
man Catholics have not solicited the membership of German Cardinals, 
Archbishops and Bishops, because they feel that purely political aims and 
polemics regarding Catholicism and the World War are irreconcilable with 
the dignity and tasks of the episcopal pastorate. 

Graf zu Arco-Zinneberg, Reichsrat der Krone Bayern, Aibling, Bayern. 

Heinrich Freiherr von Aretin, Bayer. Reichsrat, Mitglied des Reichstages, 
z. Zt. im Felde. 

Franz Xaver Bachem, Verleger der Kolnischen Volkszeitung, Koln. 

Justizrat Dr. jur. Carl Bachem, Berlin. 

Justizrat Dr. Julius Bachem, Koln. 

Valentin Graf Ballestrem, Mitglied des Herrenhauses, Berlin. 

Universitatsprofessor Dr. Bardenhewer, Apost. Protonotar, Geh. Hofrat, 
Miinchen. 

Justizrat Dr. Bell, Mitglied des Reichstages und des Preussischen Ab- 
geordnetenhauses, Essen-Ruhr. 

Professor der Rechte Dr. Beyerle, Gottingen. 

Dr.-Ing. Freiherr von Biegeleben, Grossherz. Hessischer Gesandter, 
Wirkl. Geh. Rat, Berlin. 

Professor Oskar Braun, Dekan der kath. theol. Fakultat Wiirzburg. 

Geheimrat von Brentano-Tremezzo, Mitglied des Hessischen Landtages, 
Offenbach a. M. 

ten Brink, Chefredakteur der Zeitung Germania, Berlin. 

Dr. Brockmann, Rechtsanwalt beim Oberlandesgericht, Mitglied des 
Preussischen Abgeordnetenhauses, Diisseldorf. 

Oberbiirgermeister von Bruchhausen, Trier. 

H. Briick, Mitglied des Zentralkomitees der Katholiken Deutschlands. 

Universitatsprofessor Dr. Biihler, Tubingen. 

Dr. Burguburu, Regierungs- und Gewerbemedizinalrat, Strassburg i. E., 
Mitglied des Zentralkomitees der Katholiken Deutschlands. 

Dr. Hermann Cardauns, Bonn. 

Dr. Freiherr von Coels von der Brugghen, Unterstaatssekretar, Berlin, 
Wirkl. Geh. Rat. 

Herzog von Croy, Diilmen, Westfalen. 

Geheimer Justizrat Custodis, Rheinprovinz. 

Domprediger Dr. Bonders, Minister i. W. 

Amtsgerichtsrat Engelen, Mitglied des Reichstags, Osnabruck. 

M. Erzberger, Mitglied des Reichstages, Berlin. 

Rechtsanwalt Felirenbach, Mitglied des Reichstages, Freiburg i. Br. 

Geh. Hofrat Professor Dr. Finke, Freiburg i. B. 

Pralat Forschner, Vorsitzender des Verbandes kathol. Manner- und Ar- 
beitervereine der Diozese Mainz. 

Oberregierungsrat A. Frank, Zweiter Vizeprasident der Kammer der 
Abgeordneten, Miinchen. 

Freiherr von und zu Franckenstein, erbl. Reichsrat der Krone Bayern, 
Mitglied des Reichstages, Schloss Ullstadt, Mittelfranken. 

Karl Freiherr von Freyberg, Erster Kammerer, Gutsbesitzer, Landtags- 
abgeordneter, Jetzendorf, Oberbayern. 

Dr. von Gescher, Regierungsprasident a. D., Wirkl. Geh. Oberregierungs- 
rat, Mitglied des Preussischen Abgeordnetenhauses, Miinster. 

J. Giesberts, Mitglied des Reichstages, Munchen-Gladbach. 

J. Giessler, Landgerichtsprasident, Mosbach, Baden. 

Geh. Hofrat Dr. Grauert, Miinchen. 

Landgerichtsdirektor A. Grbber, Mitglied des Reichstages und des Wiirt- 
tembergischen Landtages, Mitglied des Zentralkomitees der Katholiken 
Deutschlands, Heilbronn. 

Weingutsbesitzer Hartrath, Mitglied des Reichstages, Trier. 

Fiirst von Hatzfeldt, Herzog zu Trachenberg, Mitglied des Herrenhauses, 
Berlin. 

Heinrich Held, Vorsitzender der Zentrumsfraktion der Bayerischen Ab- 
geordnetenkammer, Regensburg. 

Dr. Georg Heim, Regensburg. 

13 



Professor Dr. Henner, Wiirzburg. 

Hermann Herder, Verlagsbuchhandler, Freiburg i. B. 

Landesokonomierat Herold, Mitglied des Reicbstages und des Preussi- 
schen Landtages, Miinster i. W. 

Ministerprasident Graf, von Hertling, Miinchen. 

Dr. Wilhelm Hess, Hochschulrektor, Bamberg, Bayern. 

Universitatsprofessor Dr. Franz Hitze, Apostolischer Protonotar, Mit- 
glied des Reichstages, Miinster i. W. 

Professor Dr. Hooerg, Dekan der katb. tbeol. Fakultat Freiburg i. B. 

Redakteur Dr. Carl Hoeoer, Koln. 

Dr. Eugen Jaeger, Kgl. Hofrat und Mitglied des Reicbstages, Speyer, 
Pfalz. 

Rektor Kamp, Vorsitzender des kath. Lebrerverbandes des Deutscben 
Reiches, Bocbum. 

Dr. Kaufmann, Prasident des Reicbsversicberungsamtes, Berlin. 

Generalstaatsanwalt Dr. von Kiene, Vizeprasident der Wiirttembergi- 
scben Abgeordnetenkammer, Stuttgart. 

Dr. Karl Kiefer, Rektor des Lyzeums, Eichstatt. 

Universitatsprofessor Dr. Wilbelm Killing, Geb. Regierungsrat, Miinster 
i. W. 

Professor Kintzinger, Stadtrat und Mitglied des Zentralkomitees der 
Katboliken Deutschlands, Metz. 

Redakteur Ernst Kley, Koln. 

Professor Dr. Klingenberg, Koln. 

August Knecht, Dr. tbeol. et jur. utr., o. 6. Univ-Prof., z. Zt. Dekan der 
katb. tbeol. Fakultat, Strassburg, Elsass, Arnoldsplatz 4. 

Universitatsprof. Dr. Kolberg, Dekan der katb. theol. Fakultat der kgl. 
Akademie in Braunsberg. 

Ferd. Kopf, Mitglied des Badiscben Landtages, Freiburg, Breisgau. 

Freiherr Ignatz von Landsberg-Steinjurt, Drensteinfurt. 

L. Lensing, Vorsitzender des Augustinusvereins zur Pflege der kath. 
Presse, Dortmund. 

Professor Dr. theol. et phil. Linneborn, Dekan der theol. phil. Fakultat 
Paderborn. 

Universitatsprofessor Dr. Karl Lux, Dekan der kath. theol. Fakultat, 
Miinster 1. W. 

Graf Magnis, Mitglied des Reichstages und des Preussischen Herren- 
hauses, Eckersdorf, Schles. 

Oberlandesgerichtsrat Marx, Mitglied des Reichstages, Dusseldorf. 

Dr. Mayer, Kaufbeuren, Mitglied des Reichstages, Miinchen. 

Carl Muller, Direktor der Germania, Akt.-Ges. fur Verlag u. Druckerei, 
Berlin. 

Geh. Justizrat Muller, Mitglied des Abgeordnetenhauses, Koblenz. 

Kommerzienrat Miiller-Hoberg, Miinchen-Gladbach. 

Professor Carl Muth, Miinchen. 

Jos. Nacken, Mitglied des Reichstages, Eschweiler b. Aachen. 

Fabrikbesitzer Neuhaus, Mitglied des Reichstages und des Badischen 
Landtages, Scbwetzingen, Baden. 

Domkapitular, Prof. Dr. Nikel, Dekan an der kath. theol. Fakultat In 
Breslau. 

Wirkl. Geh. Rat. Dr. von Orterer, Miinchen, Prasident der Bayerischen 
Abgeordnetenkammer. 

Alois Oster Vorstandsmitglied des Vereins der heiligen Kindheit Jesu, 
Aachen. 

Dr. jur. Osterrath, Geheimer Oberregierungsrat, Koniglicher Kurator der 
Universitat Gottingen, Gottingen. 

Freiherr von Pfetten-St. Mariakirchen, Ramspau b. Regensburg. 

Dompropst Dr. Franz von Pichler, Mitglied des Bayerischen Landtages, 
Passau. 

Dr. A. Pieper, Generaldirektor des Volksvereins fur das katholische 
Deutschland, Mitglied des Reichstages und des Preussischen Landtages, 
Miinchen-Gladbach. 

14 



Staatsminister Graf von Podewils, Miinchen. 

Universitatsprof. Pralat Dr. Pohle, Breslau. 

Geheimer Justizrat Dr. Porsch, Erster Vizeprasident des Preussischen 
Abgeordnetenhauses, Mitglied des Zentralkomitees der Katholiken Deutsch- 
lands, Vorsitzender der Zentrumsfraktion des Preuss. Abgeordnetenhauses, 
Breslau. 

Graf. Praschma, Mitglied des Reichstages und des Preussischen Ab- 
geordnetenhauses, Falkenberg, O.-S., z. Zt. im Felde. 

Kommerzienrat Friedrich Pustet, Regensburg. 

Bertram Furst von Quadt zu Wykradt und Isny, Isny. 

Prinz von Ratibor und Corvey, Landesprasident von Westfalen, Miinster. 

Kommerzienrat W. A. Riedemann, Hamburg. 

Justizrat August Rumpf, Miinchen. 

Hochschulrektor Dr. Jos. Sachs, Regensburg. 

Dr. Felix Graf von Saedt, Papstlicher Geheimkammerer, Miinchen. 

Universitatsprof. Dr. Sdgmiiller, Dekan an der kath. theol. Fakultat in 
Tubingen. 

Furst Salm-Reifferscheidt, Mitglied des Reichstages und erbl. Mitglied 
des Preussischen Herrenhauses, Rheinprovinz. 

Domkapitular und Generalvikar des Bistums Culm F. Scharmer, Pelplin, 
Mitglied des Zentralkomitees der Katholiken Deutschlands. 

C. M. Schiffer, Mitglied des Reichstages, Vorsitzender der christl. Gewerk- 
schaften, Dusseldorf. 

Prof. Dr. Josef Schlecht, Erzb. Geistl. Rat, z. Zt. Rektor des Kgl. Lyzeums 
Freising. 

Oberverwaltungsgerichtsrat Dr. Schlutius, Berlin. 

Geheimer Justizrat Dr. Schmitt, Mitglied des Hessischen Landtages, 
Mainz. 

Geheimer Oberjustizrat Ludwig Schmitz, Landgerichtsprasident, Aachen. 

Dr. Schneider, 1 Staatsanwalt beim Oberlandesgericht Dusseldorf. 

Staatsminister Freiherr von Schorlemer, Berlin. 

Joachim Graf und Herr von Schonburg-Olauchau, Mitglied der I. Kam- 
mer der Kgl. Sachs. Standeversammlung, Mitgl. des Zentralkomitees der 
Katholiken Deutschlands, Schloss Wechselburg i. Sachsen. 

Adolf Freiherr von Schonberg, Kgl. Sachs. Kammerherr, Geheimkam- 
merer Seiner Heiligkeit, Schloss Thammenhain, Sachsen. 

Geheimrat Professor Dr. Schulte, Bonn. 

Dr. Andr. Seider, Rektor der theol. Hochschule, Passau. 

Universitatsprofessor Dr. theol. et phil. Anton Seitz, Dekan der theol. 
Fakultat, Miinchen. 

Staatsminister Freiherr von Soden, Miinchen. 

Oberlandesgerichtsprasident Dr. Spahn, Frankfurt a. M., Vorsitzender 
der Zentrumsfraktion des Reichstages. 

Regierungsdirektor Speck, Mitglied des Bayerischen Landtages. 

Generalleutnant z. D. Freiherr von Steinaecker, Mitglied des Preus- 
sischen Abgeordnetenhauses. 

Dr. Teichert, Pelplin, Westpr. 

Grossindustrieller August Thyssen, Schloss Landsberg, Rhld. 

F. Tonberge, Geistl. Rektor, Osnabriick. 

Justizrat Trimborn, Stellvertretender 1. Vortsitzender des Volksvereins 
fiir das kath. Deutschland, Mitglied der Zivilverwaltung in Belgien, Briissel. 

Rechtsanwalt Stadtrat G. Trunk, Karlsruhe i. B. 

Freiherr von Twickel, Mitglied des Herrenhauses, Stovern b. Salzber- 
gen, Prov. Hannover, Vorsitzender des westf. Bauernvereins. 

Oberbiirgermeister Veltmann, Aachen. 

Furst von Waldburg-Wolfegg-Waldsee, Wolfegg, Wiirttemberg. 

Wirkl. Geheimer Rat Professor Dr. Waldeyer, Berlin. 

Oberbiirgermeister Wallraf, Koln. 

Jakob Weber, Essen-Ruhr, Kath. Kaufm. Vereinigungen Deutschlands. 

Senatsprasident Wellstein, Geh. Oberjustizrat, Hamm i. W., Mitglied 
des Reichstages und des Preussischen Landtages. 

15 



Pralat Dr. Werthmann, Vorsitzender des Caritasverbandes, Freiburg 
1. B. 

Burgermeister A. Windeck, MItglied des Reichstages, Hayingen, Lotbr. 

Kommerzienrat Franz Woerner, Miinchen. 

Wirklicber Geheimer Oberregierungsrat Wuermeling, Mitglied des 
Preussischen Abgeordnetenhauses, Berlin. 

Landgerichtsprasident Dr. I. A. Zehnter, Mitglied des Reichstages und 
des Badischen Landtages, Heidelberg. 

Gebeimer Justizrat Dr. am Zehnhoff, Mitglied des Reichstages, Dtissel- 
dorf. 



TELEGRAMS 

Exchanged Between the Emperor and German Catholic Prelates. 

The two German Cardinals, Archbishop von Hartmann of Cologne and 
Archbishop von Bettinger of Munich, have telegraphed to Emperor William 
as follows: 

"The calumnies flung at the German Fatherland and Its glorious 
army In the French book on 'The German War and Catholicism' have 
been a shock to us, and it is our heartfelt desire to express to Your 
Majesty our painful indignation in the name of the entire German 
Episcopate. We shall not fail to make complaint to the Supreme 
Pontiff." 

The German Emperor replied: 

"I cordially thank you and Cardinal von Bettinger for the ex- 
pression of the German Episcopate's indignation in view of the dis- 
graceful literary calumnies by which our enemies have endeavored 
to defame the German nation and army. Those assaults, too, will 
rebound from the good conscience and moral strength wherewith the 
German nation defends Its just cause, and fall back on their authors. 

WILHELM I. R." 



16 



B. 



FALSE CHARGES 

BY FRENCH CATHOLICS AGAINST GERMANY 
A REPLY TO THE BOOK: 

La Guerre Allemande et le Catholicisme 

BY 

PROFESSOR A. J. ROSENBERG 

Paderborn 




INTRODUCTION. 

FEW months ago a "Catholic Committee for French Propaganda 
Abroad" was formed at Paris, Cardinal Lucon, Archbishop of 
Reims, and Cardinal Amette, Archbishop of Paris, acting as 
honorary presidents of that Committee. Its head is Mons. Baud- 
rillart, at the time Rector of the Catholic University of Paris. 
g Nine other French bishops, several regular and secular priests, 
well-known scholars, politicians and literary men are members of the com- 
mittee. 

The committee's first publication, entitled "The German "War and Cath- 
olicism," has just come out.i The foreword was written by Cardinal Amette 
on April 11th. The book has 306 pages; it is supplemented by an album of 
32 pages (Quarto). 2 Book and album are to be published in six languages — 
French, English, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, German. So far only the 
French edition seems to have appeared.3 Seven of the essays endeavor to 
prove that Germany, owing to the teachings of her intellectuals and to the 
actions of her officers and men, shows herself an enemy to Catholicism and 
Christianity, whilst France is eulogized as the loyal and devoted daughter 
of Holy Church, such inferences being drawn from the religious attitude of 
French priests and soldiers and the majority of the French people. Ap- 
pended documents from the Pope, the Bishops and the Catholic University of 
Paris all bear upon the war. In conclusion a list of regular and secular 
priests who have fallen on the battlefield is given. 

The photographs in the album pretend to "illustrate the respective atti- 
tude of the French and German armies towards the Catholic Church."* 

The whole work is meant to incite the entire Catholic world against 
Germany. Catholics in neutral lands are to be influenced in particular. The 
direct political influence of the Catholics in neutral countries may be of no 
great importance, yet they are of prime importance as a factor in the 
creation of sentiment. It is decidedly to the political interest of France tkat 
an anti-German feeling be created among the Catholics of Spain, Switzer- 
land, Scandinavia, the United States of America, the South American coun- 
tries, and the Catholic citizens of countries already fighting on the side of 
the Triple Entente be confirmed in their hostility against Germany. So the 
book serves political ends. Moreover, it cannot be denied that these French 
circles which support the work and which may be designated briefly as the 
ecclesiastical and academic world of France, lend special force to the work, 
so that the blow struck at Germany is to be considered as a heavy and 
serious one. Hence the German Catholics cannot be denied the right to 
ward off those attacks. When a man is attacked, surely he has a right to 
defend himself. 

This work of German defense against French attacks has the support 
of the German Catholics. They have formed a committee for this purpose, 
to which belong men whose names, whose position, whose contributions to 
science and culture give them an outstanding importance. 

On the other hand — and this is in striking contrast to the personnel of 
the French committee — there is not a single Catholic bishop on the German 
committee. The specifically political purpose and the nature of the present 
polemics agree so little, according to the German conception, with the peculiar 



1 La Guerre allemande et le Catholieisme. Bloud et Gay, Paris 2,40 fr. 

2 Album Nr. 1, La Guerre all et le Cath. Bloud et Gay 1,20 fr. 

3 Since then the English edition has made Its appearance and is being distributed by the con- 
sulates of the French Republic in the United States. — Ed. 

* Album, title page. 

19 



duties of the bishop's pastoral charge, that it seemed befitting to forego the 
collaboration of the bishops in this work of defense. The participation of 
the German bishops would indeed have been morally and juridically unob- 
jectionable in view of the nature of the French attack; still it was deemed 
advisable, for the above reason, to forego it and spare the world the spec- 
tacle of a war between Catholic bishops. 

The author of this controversial rejoinder is deeply pained that he 
should have to denounce co-religionists and even dignitaries of the Church. 
For many years he fostered friendly and fruitful relations with French 
circles. When the present terrible war brought thousands of French prison- 
ers of war to Germany, he established Catholic services in the prisoners' 
camps at the Senne district near Paderborn, and at first conducted them 
alone. He is also to tkis day acting as pastor and friend of the French 
wounded at the Reserve Hospital "Kaiserhof" at Paderborn. He has inde- 
fatigably answered hundreds of inquiries made by the families of French 
prisoners of war, and has comforted many an anxious soul. He has distri- 
buted over a thousand parcels from France amongst the prisoners of war. He 
has founded a religious fortnightly publication for the French prisoners. 
More than a hundred Catholic priests are supplied with French sermons pub- 
lished by him free of charge, so that thousands may partake of the blessings 
of the word of God. In a special essay he has instructed the pastors in 
prisoners' camps in the duties and the possibilities of their calling.5 

The sentiments he entertains towards the French prisoners of war and 
towards the French nation, may be judged from the concluding remarks of 
the aforesaid essay: "There are some, at the present day, who exaggerate 
the idea of patriotism and are without compassion, even for the prisoner of 
war. They forget that every sound principle may be strained and thereby 
become false and lead into error. In spite of all patriotic enthusiasm we 
must not forget or offend against human and Christian duties. Every human 
being is made in the image of God. We are compelled to wage a fierce fight 
against the armed enemy, but when disarmed and imprisoned he is our foe 
no longer. It is delightful to watch how German soldiers treat prisoners 
of war as men of equal worth and as entitled to respect and to services of 
chivalry. Such thoughts and actions are human, humane and Christian at 
the same time." 

And now the writer of these lines learns from the French book that 
he is one of the "barbarians." And the German military authorities, too, 
that so readily help him relieve the hard fate of French prisoners of war, 
are "barbarians." All Germany has sunk into "barbarism." 

Such a reproach is bitter to those at whom it is leveled. If merely 
Individuals were concerned, they might well keep silent and resign them- 
selves to the consolation that it is better to suffer wrong than to do it. But 
the attack is directed against the whole German Fatherland, which it aims 
to injure. That being the case, we consider it not only our good right, but 
our duty to defend ourselves. The author has already done this on his own 
initiative 6 and now does so again, developing on and substantiating to some 
extent his previous statements. 

The author is particularly grieved that his words should be directed 
even at the Archbishop of Reims, Cardinal Lucon, the honorary president 
of the French Committee. He had the good fortune and the pleasure to 
render His Eminence an act of kindness for one of the prisoners of war 
whose fate he had especially at heart. Later on he applied to His Eminence 
for information as to the whereabouts of a German prisoner of war that 
was missing. Gratefully he acknowledges that His Eminence complied 
with all his wishes in a most noble-hearted manner. And now that book has 
drawn a line between the two! Who would not regret that? 



8 Rosenberg, Bin Wort tiber Kriegsgefangenenseelsorge. (Theologie tra« Glanbe, 1914. 9. 
Heft, Paderborn, ScnOningh.) 

• Rosenberg, Der deutsche Krieg nnd der Eatbolizlsmns. (Theologie nnd Glaube, 1915. 
Heft 5. Paderborn, Schonlngh.) 

20 



But to come to the point. Every chapter of the following pages is 
arranged after the same method. First the main points of the French 
attack are briefly summarized; then follows a brief refutation, verified by 
documents. In some chapters the documents could be dispensed with. 

Appendix 1. 

Title Page of the. French Book. 

La Guerre Allemande et le Catholicisme. Ouvrage Publie sous la Direction de 
Mgr. Alfred Baudrillart, Recteur de l'lnstitut Catholique de Paris 
et sous le haut Patronage du Comite Catholique de Propagande Frangaise 
a l'Etranger. Lettre de S. Em. le Cardinal Amette, Archeveque de Paris. 
— Les Lois Chretiennes de la Guerre par le chanoine B. Gaudeau. — La 
"Culture Germanique" et le Catholicisme par Georges Goyau. — Le R51e 
Catholique de la France dans le Monde par un Missionaire. — La Guerre 
aux Egllses et aux PrStres par Frangois Veuillot. — La Religion dans 
l'Armee frangaise L'AumOnerie militaire et la Situation canonique du 
Pretre a l'Arm6e par le chanoine Couget. — La Religion de nos Soldats 
par le chanoine Ardant. — La Profondeur du Mouvement religieux dans 
l'Armee frangaise par Mgr. Alfred Baudrillart. — Documents Pontificaux 
et Episcopaux relatifs a la Guerre. — Reponse de l'lnstitut Catholique au 
Manifeste des repr6sentants de la Science et de l'Art Allemands. — Lists 
des Ecciesiastiques et des Religieux tu6s a ou par l'ennemi. — Prix 2 fr 
40 Net. Bloud et Gay Paris. 

Appendix 2. 

Members of the French Committee. 

Comite Catholique de Propagande Franca! se a l'Etranger: 

Presidents d'honneur: Son Eminence le Cardinal L u g o n, Archeveque de 
Reims; Son Eminence le Cardinal Amette, Archeveque de Paris. Directeur: 
Monseigneur Baudrillart, Recteur de l'lnstitut Catholique de Paris. 

Sa Grandeur Monseigneur T u r i n a z, Eveque de Nancy. Sa Grandeur 
Monseigneur Foucault, Eveque de Saint-Die. Sa Grandeur Monseigneur 
G 1 n 1 s t y, Eveque de Verdun. Sa Grandeur Monseigneur D i z i e n, Eveque 
d'Amiens. Sa Grandeur Monseigneur Lobbedey, Ev§que d'Arras. Sa Gran- 
deur Monseigneur Pechenard, Eveque de Soissons. Sa Grandeur Monseigneur 
M a r b e a u, Eveque de Meaux. Sa Grandeur Monseigneur T i s s i e r, Evgque 
de Chalons. Sa Grandeur Monseigneur L e Roy, Eveque d'Alinda, Supfirieur 
genfer. des Peres du Saint-Esprit. 

Messieurs Etienne L a m y, Secretaire perpetuel de l'Academie Frangaise. 
le Comte d'Haussonville, de l'Academie Frangaise. Paul Bourget, 
de l'Academie Frangaise. le Marquis de Vogue, de l'Academie Frangaise. 
Rene Bazin.de l'Academie Frangaise. Rene Doumic, de l'Academie 
Frangaise. Denys Cochin, de l'Academie Frangaise. Pierre de la G o r c e, 
de l'Academie Frangaise. le R. P. S c h e i 1, de l'Academie des Inscriptions et 
Belles-Lettres. Edouard Branly, de l'Academie des Sciences. Charles 
W i d o r, Secretaire perpetuel de l'Academie des Beaux- Arts, le Comte de 
Franqueville, de l'Academie des Sciences Morales et Poli tiques. l'Admiral 
de La J a i 1 1 e, Senateur de la Loire-Inferieure. de Lamarzelle, S6nateur 
du Morbihan. de Las Cases, senateur de la Lozere. Jenouvrier, sena- 
teur de l'llle-et-Vilaine. Ballande, Depute de la Gironde. le Comte Ferrl 
d e L u d r e, Depute de Meurthe-et-Moselle. de Gailhard -~B a n c e 1, Depute 
de l'Ardeche. Groussau, Depute du Nord. de Lavrlgnais, Depute de 
la Vende«» L e r o 1 1 e, D6put6 de Paris. A. Mithouard, President du 
Conseil Municipal de Paris. P. C h e r e s t, President du Conseii General de la 
Seine. Aucoc, Vice-President du Conseil General, Membre de la Chambre de 
Commerce. Geoffroyde Grandmaison, President de la Societe Biblio- 
graphique. le R. P. Janvier, Aumonler de la Corporation des Publicistes 
Chretiens, le R. P. D u d o n, Publiciste. Georges Goyau, Publiciste. L. d e 
Lanzac de Laborie, Publiciste. Frangois Veuillot, Publiciste. 



21 



I. OUTBREAK OF THE WAR. 

A) The French Charges. 

The French book begins with an essay by Canon B. Gaudeau, who dis- 
cusses the Christian law regarding the war, and makes Germany responsible 
for the outbreak of the present war. Common sense can tell you so, says 
the Rev. Canon, and no intrigue or falsehood can reason hard facts away. 7 
Having argued his case at length, he concludes: "It is Germany that wanted 
and brought about this predatory war, an aggressive, unjust and anti- 
Christian war."8 

The same indictment is found in several other passages of the book. 
Bishop Turinaz says in his pastoral of February 2, 1915, that Germany has 
prepared this war for forty years.9 Bishop Lobbedey holds similar opinions: 
An unjust attack started this war. The Germans began it, and we are the 
victims.io The Catholic University of Paris maintains that the diplomatic 
documents that have been published prove irrefutably that Germany with 
premeditation let loose the war, and thwarted all attempts at reconciliation.!! 
So Germany stands convicted: She prepared the war for a long time, and 
became aggressive at a favorable opportunity; France wages a just defensive, 
but Germany an unjust offensive. Hence Germany offends against Christian 
morals. 

B) The German Answer. 

y? N most cases the peoples of belligerent countries are hardly in a position 
I to decide whether a war that breaks out is just or unjust. It is impossible 
^ for them to realize sufficiently past facts which led up to the war, past 
feelings and events, political tensions and solutions, all the explosive material 
that was left and that gathered like thunderclouds before the storm. They 
cannot disentangle, nor even survey, the complication of facts which, as a 
rule, immediately precedes the outbreak of a war. They do not know, and 
therefore cannot justly appreciate, the course of diplomatic negotiations. 
Moralists take this fact into due consideration, and say that it is the 
soldier's right and duty, in every belligerent country, to serve in the national 
army and march against the foe. 

It will take a long time before the nations will arrive at a uniform 
and impartial opinion on the subject. Men have to be at the right distance 
from historical events before they can weigh them soberly, without self- 
interest, and with pure zeal for the truth. Even then it is difficult to arrive 
at a unanimous, universally acknowledged opinion. Just think of the in- 
finite labor and research that was required to establish the merits and 
demerits of one or the other historic personage, or to give a final 



7 B. 21 (References to B. mean the French book, those to A. the Album): "Qne l'Alle- 
magne solt responsable de la guerre, c'est une evidence de bon sens que nulle subtllltfi, nul 
mensonge ne parviendront k obscurcir." 

8 B. 23: "C'est done bien la guerre de prole, la guerre d'injuste agression, la guerre 
antichretlenne, que l'Allemagne a voulue et qu'elle a falte." 

8 B. 250: ". . . . parce que cette guerre pr#paree pendant qnarante ans par bos 
ennemis, a 6te entreprise au m£pris des traltes " 

io B. 263: ". . . .11 est certain que la guerre a commence par une agression lnjuste, 
qu'lls en sont Irs auteurs et nous les Tlctimes." 

11 B. 281: ". . . . documents qui etablissent d'une fa<;on peremptoire que l'Allemagne 
a premfidite la guerre et a fait fchouer toutes les tentatives de conciliation." 

22 



verdict on some historical fact. Frequently the picture has remained in- 
distinct and varying up to the present. Consider the views held even today 
of Gregory VII and Napoleon, or of events like the thirty years' war, and 
others. 

Hence a reasonable objection may be taken to Gaudeau's remark that 
common sense can adduce direct evidence that the present war is Germany's 
fault. With such questions common sense is not concerned at all. Gaudeau 
should have known that all soldiers fighting on the other side reject his 
views and are convinced of the contrary. And, after all, they have some 
claim, too, to common sense. Moreover, it is rather bad form to presume 
that an opponent, by trickery and lies, wants to make out his cause as 
good. German Catholics feel convinced that France is wrong. But it never 
enters their heads to say that individual Frenchmen resort to intrigues and 
falsehood in order to represent the war which they wage as just. German 
Catholics prefer to think that the French, with a few exceptions, are acting 
in good faith. 

Who was it that brought about the war? Mere common sense cannot 
answer that question, which must be approached with knowledge and con- 
sideration of many and most complicated conditions. But French writers 
who know their own country and nation should be particularly careful not 
to jump hastily at the conclusion that Germany premeditated the war for 
the last forty years, and therefore prepared herself for a war of aggression. 

In reality it was France which indulged in hopes and ambitions of 
"revanche" for fully forty years. She could not get over the loss of two 
provinces. That was the "wound that ever bleeds." Thoughts of revenge 
were fostered and spread within those very circles whose authority supports 
the book and album. 

These thoughts of revenge impelled France to look out for allies. With- 
out them, the French had no chance of defeating the German Empire, where 
the birth rate increased year by year, at last almost by a million. They 
knew that their own birth rate was ever going down so that in one year 
(1911) more people died than were born. But in modern warfare of evenly 
or nearly evenly matched nations numbers count for a very great deal. 
France, therefore, looked out for help and found it in Russia. 

France loaned money to the Russians whom she wanted to use against 
Germany. Political and strategic conditions were attached to the granted 
loans. France then entered an entente with the English although they had 
fought against her for centuries. Not even the "Fashoda insult" could 
alienate France from her friend, because revenge on Germany was upper- 
most in the French mind and silenced all secondary considerations. 

France premeditated and prepared the war: There is no doubt of it. 
As a matter of course, Germany braced herself up for the fight, too. Si vis 
pacem para bellum! (If you want peace prepare for war.) Germany shrank 
from no sacrifice, and willingly bore the heavy burden of armaments because 
she could only thus preserve peace for herself and for the world. The 
Empire fulfilled this task during the forty years of its existence and did 
not even disappoint the hopes of pacificists during the three critical periods, 
1887, 1905, and 1911. During the Balkan Wars the German Empire did its 
utmost to localize the struggle, and preserve the world's peace. In 1913, at 
the Kaiser's jubilee, he was rightly celebrated throughout the world as 
"Friedenskaiser" — Emperor of Peace. 

French thoughts of revenge and Muscovite lust of expansion joined 
hands. When Russia, defeated by Japan, turned her eyes once more to the 
Near East, the outbreak of the present conflagration was only a question 
of time. Russia saw a revival of Panslavism which was eager to smash 
Austria-Hungary and Turkey. 

England, too, was eager to co-operate against her keen and efficient 
business competitor. She felt so bitter against Germany that she did not 
even shrink from an alliance with the most formidable opponent to British 
policy in the East. Explosives were thus heaped high and only a spark 
was needed to set them off. 

23 



Servia applied the torch by the diabolical assassination at Serajevo. 
The Dual Monarchy was compelled to enforce satisfaction with arms. The 
execrable murder of the heir to the throne and his consort was only the 
climax of a long series of the gravest provocations. Russia did not 
utter a word of abhorrence for the criminal attempt and its authors, one 
of whom was the Crown Prince of Servia. But the Czar immediately de- 
nounced Austria's fight as an "infamous war." The situation became critical. 

Germany then went out of her way and advised Austria to promise not 
to touch the territorial integrity of Servia. Austria made a declaration to 
that effect. The resumption of the exchange of views between Vienna and 
Petrograd, which had been interrupted for several days, was also due to 
Germany's initiative. But she did not succeed in her efforts to pursuade 
Paris to exercise a restraining influence on Russia, even as Germany had 
influenced Austria. She did everything in her power to localize the quarrel, 
and prevent a universal conflagration. But all was in vain. On July 25, 
Russia decided on mobilization. On July 29, the German Minister at Berne 
sent word to Berlin that France had arrayed 80,000 men at the eastern 
frontier. As early as July 24 the commander of the British fleet had taken 
measures to concentrate his ships at Portland^; the French Yellow Book 
(No. 66) admits that. Yet Germany and her Emperor continued to work 
for peace. On July 29, Russia mobilized against Austria, and in the night 
from July 30 to 31 she ordered the general mobilization, that is to say 
against Germany too. Thereupon, on July 31, Germany declared a state 
of threatening war danger, but mobilization was not decreed until the 
evening of August 1. 

When the German ultimatum had been handed to Russia, and a Russo- 
German war had become inevitable, Germany still endeavored in Paris and 
London to prevent a further conflagration, and suggested that France and 
England should remain neutral. But her good offices again suffered ship- 
wreck. On August 2, France, without declaring war, established a state 
of war with Germany, French border troops attacking soldiery, crossing the 
border at several points, and occupying sundry localities in Upper Alsace. 
Moreover, French aviators dropped bombs in Bavaria, Baden, and the Rhine 
Province. On August 4, England declared war on Germany. 

Common sense, to which Gaudeau appeals, is therefore not in a position 
at all to name the authors of the war. But human reason, guided by actual 
facts and the published documents, is in duty bound to attack any statement 
to the effect that the war was the wish and fault of Germany. In very 
many minds political passion has overthrown reason, and that accounts for 
the assumption of Germany's lust of war. 

C) Appendices to I. 

Lest we burden this booklet with too many documents, we have selected 
only a few from a very abundant material; and this holds good not only 
for this chapter, but also for the succeeding ones. 

Appendix 1 gives a number of telegrams exchanged just before the out- 
break of the war, from which it appears that the Franco-German war might 
have been prevented, and that Germany was resolved upon avoiding it. 

Appendix 2 gives the explanations contained in the German White Book 
of August 2, 1914. In this remarkable document no error has been estab- 
lished by anyone. 

Appendix 3 gives the report of the Belgian Charg§ d'Affairs in St. 
Petersburg, dated July 30, 1914, which shows the opinion prevailing in dip- 
lomatic circles as late as two days before the German mobilization, that 
Germany did the utmost in Vienna, as well as in St. Petersburg, to localize 
the war and to prevent a world-wide conflagration. 



12 Cf. Randglossen zum franzosischen Gelbbuch. Berlin. Concordia. S. 14, 20, 28. 28. 

24 



Appendix I, 1. 

Documents Referring to the Political Exchange of Views Between 

Germany and England. 13 

(Norddeutsche Allgemelne Zeltung, August 21, 1914.) 

The following documents refer to the exchange of views 
between Germany and England immediately before the war broke 
out. It will be perceived from these documents that Germany was 
prepared to spare France in case England should remain neutral 
and would guarantee the neutrality of France. 

Telegram of His Royal Highness Prince Henry of Prussia to H. JV1. the Kins 
of England of July 30, 1914. 

Am here tince yesterday, have informed William of what You kindly told 
Me at Buckingham Palace last Sunday who gratefully received Your message. 

William, much preoccupied, is trying his utmost to fulfill Nicky's appeal 
to him to work for maintenance of peace and is in constant telegraphic 
communication with Nicky who today confirms news that military measures 
have been ordered by him equal to mobilization, measures which have been 
taken already five days ago. 

We are furthermore informed that France is making military prepara- 
tions whereas we have taken no measures but may be forced to do so any 
moment should our neighbors continue which then would mean a European 
war. 

If You really and earnestly wish to prevent this terrible disaster, may I 
suggest You using Your influence on France and also Russia to keep neutral 
which seems to Me would be most useful. 

This I consider a very good, perhaps the only chance, to maintain the 
peace of Europe. 

I may add that now more than ever Germany and England should lend 
each other mutual help to prevent a terrible catastrophe which otherwise seems 
unavoidable. 

Believe Me that William is most sincere in his endeavors to maintain 
peace, but that the military preparations of his two neighbors may at last 
force him to follow their example for the safety of his own country, which 
otherwise would remain defenseless. 

I have informed William of My telegram to You and hope You will receive 
My informations in the same spirit of friendship which suggested them. 

Signed: Henry. 

Telegram of H. M. the King of England to Prince Henry of Prussia of 

July 30, 1914. 

Thanks for Your telegram so pleased to hear of William's efforts to 
concert with Nicky to maintain peace. Indeed I am earnestly desirous that 
such an irreparable disaster as a European war should be averted. My Gov- 
ernment is doing its utmost suggesting to Russia and France to suspend 
further military preparations if Austria will consent to be satisfied with 
occupation of Belgrade and neighbouring Servian territory as a hostage for 
satisfactory settlement of her demands, other countries meanwhile suspending 
their war preparations. Trust William will use his great Influence to Induce 
Austria to accept this proposal, thus proving that Germany and England are 
working together to prevent what would be an international catastrophe. 
Pray assure William I am doing and shall continue to do all that lies in My 
power to preserve peace of Europe. 

Signed: George. 

Telegram of His Majesty the Emperor to H. M. the King of England of 

July 31, 1914. 

Many thanks for kind telegram. Your proposals coincide with My ideas 
and with the statements I got last night from Vienna which I had forwarded 
to London. I just received news from chancellor that official notification has 
just reached him that last night Nicky has ordered the mobilization of his 
whole army and fleet. He has not even awaited the results of the mediation 
I am working at and left Me without any news. I am off for Berlin to take 



l» Aktenstnecke sum Kriegsaosbruch. Herausgegeben vom Auswartlgen Amte. 8. 44-87. — 
We reproduce the telegrams in the translation of tbe German White Book. Authorized edition foi 
America. — Ed. 

26 



measures for ensuring safety of My eastern frontiers where strong Russian 
troops are already posted. 

Signed: Willy. 

Telegram of the King of England to His Majesty the Emperor of 

August 1, 1914. 

Many thanks for Your telegram last night. I sent an urgent telegram to 
Nicky expressing My readiness to do everything in My power to assist in 
reopening conversations between powers concerned. 

Signed: Georgie. 

Telegram of the German Ambassador In London to the Chancellor of 

August 1, 1914. 

Sir E. Grey just asked me by telephone whether I believed to be in a 
position to declare that we would not attack France in a war between Germany 
and Russia in case France should remain neutral. I declared I believed to be 
able to give such an assurance. 

Signed: Lichnowsky. 

Telegram of His Majesty the Emperor to H. M. the King of England of 

August 1, 1914. 

I just received the communication from Tour government offering French 
neutrality under guarantee of Great Britain. Added to this offer was the 
enquiry whether under these conditions Germany would refrain from attacking 
France. On technical grounds My mobilization which had already been 
proclaimed this afternoon must proceed against two fronts, east and west, 
as prepared; this cannot be countermanded because I am sorry Your telegram 
came so late. But if France offers Me neutrality which must be guaranteed 
by the British fleet and army I shall of course refrain from attacking France 
and employ My troops elsewhere. I hope that France will not become nervous. 
The troops on My frontier are in the act of being stopped by telegraph and 
telephone from crossing into France. 

Signed: Wllhelm. 

Telegram of the Chancellor to the German Ambassador at London of 

August 1, 1914. 

Germany is ready to accept British proposal in case England guarantees 
with all her forces absolute neutrality of France in Russo-German conflict. 
German mobilization has been ordered to-day on account of Russian challenge 
before English proposal was known here. It is therefore now impossible to 
make any change in strategical distribution of troops ordered to the French 
frontier. But we guarantee that our troops will not cross the French frontier 
before 7 p. m. on Monday, the 3rd inst., in case England will pledge herself 
meanwhile. 

Signed: Bethmann Hollweg 

Telegram of H. M. the King of England to His Majesty the Emperor of 

August 1, 1914. 

In answer to Tour telegram just received I think there must be some 
misunderstanding as to a suggestion that passed in friendly conversation 
between Prince Lichnowsky and Sir Edward Grey this afternoon when they 
were discussing how actual fighting between German and French armies 
might be avoided while there is still a chance of some agreement between 
Austria and Russia. Sir Edward Grey will arrange to see Prince Lichnowsky 
early tomorrow morning to ascertain whether there is a misunderstanding on 
his part. 

Signed: George. 

Telegram of the German Ambassador In London to the Chancellor of 

August 2, 1914. 

Sir E. Grey's suggestions were prompted by a desire to make It possible 
for England to keep permanent neutrality, but as they were not based on a 
previous understanding with France and made without knowledge of our 
mobilization, they have been abandoned as absolutely hopeless. 

Signed: Lichnowsky. 

26 



The essence of Germany's declarations is contained in Emperor William's 
telegram to the King of England of August 1st, 1914. Even if there existed a 
misunderstanding as to an English proposal, the Kaiser's offer furnished Eng- 
land the opportunity to prove her pacific disposition and to prevent the Franco- 
German war. 

Appendix I, 2. 

Memorial Presented to the German Reichstag on August 3, 1914.14 

(Translation from October Issue [1914] of "International Conciliation." 

New York.) 

On June 28 last the successor to the Austrian throne, Archduke Franz 
Ferdinand, and his wife, the Duchess of Hohenberg, were assassinated by the 
revolver shots of a member of a Servian band of conspirators. An investiga- 
tion of the crime by Austro-Hungarian officials has revealed that the plot to 
take the life of the Archduke was planned and promoted in Belgrade with the 
co-operation of official Servian individuals and was carried out with weapons 
from the Servian Government depot. 

This crime was bound to open the eyes of the whole civilized world, not 
only with regard to the object of Servian politics as relating to the existence 
and integrity of the Austro-Hungarian monarchy, but also with regard to the 
criminal means that Pan-Servian propaganda did not hesitate to employ 
in order to attain these ends. The ultimate object of these policies was to 
revolutionize gradually and finally to bring about a separation of the south- 
western region of the Austro-Hungarian monarchy from that empire and unite 
it with Servia. 

The repeated and formal declaration of Servia to Austria-Hungary to bring 
about good neighborly relations did not change this trend of Servian politics 
in the least. B^or the third time in the course of the last six years Servia 
has brought Europe to the verge of a world war in this manner. She could 
only do this because she believed herself supported by Russia in her endeavors. 

As a result of the developments of the year 1908 growing out of the 
Turkish revolution, Russian policies had begun to organize a league of the 
Balkan States directed against the existence of Turkey, under Russian patron- 
age. This alliance of the Balkan States which was successful in crowding 
Turkey out of her European possessions in 1911, came to grief over the question 
of the disposition of the spoils. Russian policy was not, however, frightened 
by this failure. It was the idea of Russian statesmen that there should be 
formed a new Balkan League under Russian patronage, whose activities should 
be directed this time not against Turkey, which had been driven from the 
Balkans, but against the existence of the Austro-Hungarian monarchy. The 
idea was that Servia should cede to Bulgaria the section of Macedonia that 
she had won in the last Balkan war and offset the loss by the acquisition of 
Bosnia and Herzegovina at the expense of the Monarchy of the Danube. For 
this purpose Bulgaria, by her isolation, was to be made pliable, Rumania, as 
the result of a propaganda undertaken with the aid of France, was to be 
chained to Russia, and Servia was to be referred to Bosnia and Herzegovina. 

In view of these circumstances Austria had to admit that it would not be 
consistent either with the dignity or self-preservation of the monarchy to 
look on longer at the operations on the other side of the border without tak- 
ing action. The Austro-Hungarian Government advised us of this view of 
the situation and asked our opinion in the matter. "We were able to assure our 
ally most heartily of our agreement with her view of the situation and to 
assure her that any action that she might consider necessary to take in 
order to put an end to the movement in Servia directed against the existence 
of the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy would receive our approval. We were 
fully aware in this connection that warlike moves on the part of Austria- 
Hungary against Servia would bring Russia into the question and might 
draw us into a war in accordance with our duty as an ally. However, recog- 
nizing the vital interests of Austria-Hungary which were at stake, we could 
neither advise our ally to a compliance that would have been inconsistent 
with her dignity, nor could we deny her our support in this great hour of 
need. We were all the more unable to do this inasmuch as our interests 
also were seriously threatened as a result of the continuous Servian agitation. 
If Servia, with the help of Russia and France, had been allowed to imperil 
the existence of the neighboring monarchy any longer, this would lead to the 
gradual downfall of Austria and would result in submission to Slavic sway 
under the Russian sceptre, thus making the position of the Germanic race in 
Central Europe untenable. A morally weakened Austria breaking down as 
the result of the advance of Russian Pan-Slavism would no longer be an ally 
on whom we could count and v.pon whom we could rely, such as we need in 
view of the attitude of our eastern and western neighbors, which has con- 
stantly grown more threatening. We therefore gave Austria an entirely free 
hand in her action against Servia. We have taken no part in the preparations. 



i* Aktenstuecke zum Kriegsausbruch. S. S-10. 

27 



Austria chose the way, laying before the Servian Government in detail the 
immediate relation between the murder and the general Servian movement, 
not only tolerated by the Servian Government, but supported by it, which an 
investigation of the murder at Serajevo had established. At the same time 
Servia was asked by Austria to put an absolute end to these activities and to 
allow Austria to punish the guilty parties. Austria demanded as a guarantee 
for the carrying out of the proceedings participation in the investigation on 
Servian territory and the definite dissolution of the various Pan-Servian 
societies carrying on an agitation against Austria-Hungary. The Imperial and 
Royal Government set a time limit of forty-eight hours for the unconditional 
acceptance of its terms. One day after the Austro-Hungarian note had been 
handed to it the Servian Government began mobilization. When, after the 
expiration of the time limit, the Servian Government made a reply which, 
while satisfying the demands of Austria-Hungary on certain points, made 
known emphatically with regard to the essential ones its intention to refuse 
the just demands of the monarchy by means of temporizing and the introduc- 
tion of new negotiations, Austria broke off diplomatic relations with Servia 
without having recourse to further negotiations or allowing herself to be put 
off by Servian assurances, the value of which she knows well enough — to her 
sorrow. 

From that moment Austria was actually in a state of war with Servia, 
which was publicly proclaimed by means of the official declaration of war on 
the 28th of the month. 

From the very beginning of the conflict we took the stand that this was 
an affair of Austria which she alone would have to bring to a decision with 
Servia. We have therefore devoted our entire efforts to localizing the war and 
to convincing the other powers that Austria-Hungary was compelled to take 
justified defensive methods and appeal to arms. We took the stand emphatic- 
ally that no civilized nation had the right in this struggle against lack of 
culture [Unkultur] and criminal political morality to prevent Austria from 
acting and to take away the just punishment from Servia. We instructed our 
representatives abroad in that sense. 

At the same time the Austro-Hungarian Government informed the Russian 
Government that her (Austria's) move against Servia was entirely a defensive 
measure designed to put a stop to Servian agitation, but that Austria-Hungary 
was compelled by necessity to demand guarantees of a continued friendly 
attitude on the part of Servia toward the Austro-Hungarian monarchy. Aus- 
tria-Hungary, the note to Russia stated, had no intention of bringing about a 
disturbance of the balance of power in the Balkans. Both the French and 
the English Government replying to our explanation that the German Govern- 
ment wished and was trying to localize the conflict, promised to work in the 
same interest. In the meantime these efforts did not succeed in preventing 
Russia's interference in the Austro-Servian disagreement. 

The Russian Government issued an official communique on July 24, accord- 
ing to which it would be impossible for Russia to remain indifferent in the 
Servian-Austrian conflict. The Russian Minister for Foreign Affairs, Mr. 
Sazonof, made this position known to the Imperial Ambassador, Count 
Pourtales. On the afternoon of July 26 the Austro-Hungarian Government 
again explained through its Ambassador in St. Petersburg that Austria- 
Hungary had no plans of conquest, but only wished to have peace at last on 
her frontiers. In the course of the same day the first reports of Russian 
mobilization reached Berlin. On the evening of the 26th the Imperial Ambas- 
sadors at London, Paris, and St. Petersburg were directed to call the attention 
of the English, French, and Russian Governments energetically to the danger 
of this Russian mobilization. After Austria-Hungary had officially declared to 
Russia that she did not seek the acquisition of any territory in Servia, the 
decision for world peace lay entirely in St. Petersburg. The same day the 
Imperial Ambassador at St. Petersburg was directed to make the following 
statement to the Russian Government: 

The military preparatory measures of Russia will compel us to 
take counter-action which must consist in the mobilization of the 
army. Mobilization, however, indicates war. Inasmuch as we know 
France's obligations toward Russia, this mobilization would be directed 
simultaneously against Russia and France. We cannot assume that 
Russia wishes to let loose such a European war. Inasmuch as Austria- 
Hungary will not impair the continuance of the Servian Kingdom, we 
are of the opinion that Russia can adopt a policy of waiting. We shall 
be all the more able to support Russia's wish not to allow the integrity 
of the Servian Kingdom to be called into question, since Austria does 
not call this Integrity into question herself. It will be easy to find a 
basis of agreement In the further course of the affair. 

On July 27 the Russian Minister for War, Suchomlinof, gave the German 
Military Attache his word of honor that no mobilization order had as yet been 
Issued. He said that for the present preparatory measures were being taken, 
no horses being levied and no reservists being called in. In case Austria- 
Hungary were to cross the Servian boundary, the military districts facing 
Austria, those of Kieff, Odessa, Moscow, and Kazan, would be mobilized. Under 
no circumstances would there be a mobilization of the districts lying on the 
German front: St. Petersburg, Vilna, and Warsaw. In answer to the Military 

28 



Attache's question as to what was the object of mobilization against Austria- 
Hungary, the Russian War Minister shrugged his shoulders and referred to 
the diplomats. Thereupon the Military Attache indicated that measures to 
mobilize against Austria-Hungary were also decidedly threatening to Ger- 
many. In the following days reports concerning the Russian mobilization fol- 
lowed each other in quick succession. Among these were reports concerning 
preparations on the German border, such as the declaration of a state of war 
in Kovno, the departure of the Warsaw garrison, and the strengthening of the 
Alexandrovo garrison. On July 27 the first reports of preparatory" measures by 
France arrived. The Fourteenth Corps discontinued its manoeuvres and 
returned to garrison duty. 

In the meantime we continued to exert our most energetic influence on the 
Cabinets to insure the localization of the conflict. 

On the 26th Sir Edward Grey had suggested that the differences between 
Austria-Hungary and Servia be laid before a conference of the Ambassadors 
of Germany, France, and Italy, with himself presiding over the sessions. To 
this suggestion we replied that, while we approved his tender, we could not 
take part in such a conference because we could not call upon Austria to appear 
before a European court in her controversy with Servia. 

France agreed to Sir Edward Grey's proposal, but it was finally brought to 
naught because Austria, as was to be expected, held herself aloof. 

True to our conviction that an act of mediation could not take into con- 
sideration the Austro-Servian conflict, which was purely an Austro-Hungarian 
affair, but would have to take into consideration only the relations between 
Austria-Hungary and Russia, we continued our efforts to bring about an 
understanding between these two powers. We were also willing, after declin- 
ing the conference idea, to transmit a further proposal by Sir Edward Grey 
to Vienna, in which he urged that Austria-Hungary either agree to accept the 
Servian answer as sufficient or to look upon it as a basis for further conversa- 
tions. The Austro-Hungarian Government, in full appreciation of our media- 
tory activity, replied to this proposal that, coming as it did after the opening 
of hostilities, it was too late. 

In spite of this we continued our mediatory efforts to the utmost and 
advised Vienna to make any possible compromise consistent with the dignity 
of the Monarchy. Unluckily, all of these mediatory acts were soon overtaken 
by the military preparations of Russia and France. On July 29 the Russian 
Government officially announced in Berlin that it had mobilized four army 
districts. At the same time additional reports reached us of rapidly pro- 
gressing military preparations by France on land and sea. On the same day 
the Imperial Ambassador at St. Petersburg had a conversation with the Russian 
Minister for Foreign Affairs concerning which he reported as follows by 
telegraph: 

The Minister tried to persuade me to agree in behalf of my Gov- 
ernment to a conversation of four parties to devise means of moving 
Austria-Hungary to give up those demands touching on the sov- 
ereignty of Servia. While I agreed to a complete transmission of the 
conversation, I took the stand that, since Russia had decided on the 
ominous step of mobilization, it was difficult for me to exchange any 
opinions on this subject, and it almost seemed impossible to do so. 
I said that what Russia now demanded of us in respect to Austria- 
Hungary was the same thing of which Austria-Hungary was accused 
regarding Servia — a usurpation of the rights of sovereignty; that 
Austria-Hungary had promised to be considerate of Russian interests 
by declaring her territorial disinterestedness, a great concession on 
the part of a nation waging war. For this reason, I said, an oppor- 
tunity should be given the Dual Monarchy to settle her dispute with 
Servia alone. There would be time enough to come back to the sub- 
ject of safeguarding Servian sovereignty when peace terms were to 
be concluded. 

I added very earnestly that at the present moment the Austro- 
Servian affair was secondary to the danger of a European conflagra- 
tion, and I made every effort to show the Minister the greatness of this 
danger. 

It was impossible to change Sazonof's mind on the point that 
Russia could not desert Servia now. 

Similarly the Military Attache at St. Petersburg reported by telegraph on 
the 29th as follows, regarding an interview with the Chief of the General Staff 
of the Russian Army: 

The Chief of the General Staff asked me to call and informed me 
that he had just come from His Majesty. He stated that he had been 
instructed by the Minister for War to assure me again that every- 
thing had remained the same as it had been explained to me by the 
Minister two days ago. He offered me a written confirmation and gave 
me his word of honor in the most formal manner that mobilization 
had begun nowhere, that is to say, not a single man or horse had been 
levied up to that hour, three o'clock In the afternoon. He stated that 
he could not answer for the future, but he could declare most emphat- 
ically that no mobilization was desired by His Majesty in the districts 

29 



touching on our boundary. However, many reports have reached here 
and also Warsaw and Vilna of the levying of reservists in various 
parts of the empire. I therefore told the General that I was con- 
fronted with a riddle as the result of his announcements to me. On 
his word as an officer he repeated, however, that such reports were 
untrue; that a false alarm may have been raised here and there. 

In view of the positive, numerous reports before me of actual 
levying, I am compelled to consider the conversation as an attempt to 
mislead us in regard to the extent of the measures that have already 
been taken. 

Inasmuch as the Russian Government, in reply to the several inquiries 
regarding the reasons for its threatening attitude, several times alluded to the 
circumstance that Austria-Hungary had not yet begun any conversations in 
St. Petersburg, the Austro-Hungarian Ambassador, at our request, was directed 
on July 29 to begin the conversation with Mr. Sazonof. Count Szapary was 
authorized to make known to the Russian Minister the contents of the note 
to Servia which had been, as it were, overtaken by the declaration of war, 
and to receive any suggestions that might still come from the Russian side, as 
well as to discuss with Sazonof all questions touching directly on the Austro- 
Russian relations. 

Shoulder to shoulder with England we continued to work without cessa- 
tion for mediation, and supported every suggestion in Vienna which we 
believed showed hope of the possibility of a peaceful settlement of the con- 
flict. As late as the 30th we transmitted an English proposal to Vienna which 
established this basis of negotiation, that Austria-Hungary, after succeeding 
in marching into Servia, should dictate her terms there. We had to assume 
that Russia would accept this basis. 

While these efforts of ours for mediation, supported by English diplomacy, 
were being continued with increasing urgency in the time from July 29 to the 
31st, there constantly came new and increasing reports concerning Russian 
mobilization measures. The assembling of troops on the East Prussian border 
and the declaration of a state of war in all important places on the Russian 
western boundary no longer left any doubt of the fact that Russian mobiliza- 
tion was actively going on against us, while at the same time all such meas- 
ures were denied anew on word of honor to our representative at St. Peters- 
burg. Even before the reply to the last English-German mediation proposal, 
the basis of which must have been known in St. Petersburg, could reach 
Berlin from Vienna, Russia ordered a general mobilization. On the same day 
an exchange of telegrams took place between his Majesty the Kaiser and 
King and Czar Nicholas in which his Majesty called the Czar's attention to 
the threatening character of the Russian mobilization and to the continuance 
of his own activity as mediator. 

On July 31 the Czar directed the following telegram to his Majesty: 

I thank you from my heart for your mediation, which permits a 
gleam of hope that everything can yet be settled peaceably. It is a 
technical impossibility for us to halt our military preparations which 
became necessary through Austria's mobilization. We are far from 
desirous of war. So long as the negotiations continue with Austria 
concerning Servia, my troops will not undertake any challenging 
action. I solemnly pledge you my word as to that. I am trusting in 
the grace of God with all my might and hope for the success of your 
mediation in Vienna, for the welfare of our countries and for the peace 
of Europe. Your sincerely devoted 

NICHOLAS. 

To this his Majesty the Kaiser replied: 

Upon your appeal to my friendship and your plea for my help, I 
have undertaken a mediatory action between your Government and 
the Austro-Hungarian Government. While this negotiation was under 
way your troops were mobilized against Austria-Hungary, which is 
allied with me, as a consequence of which my mediation was almost 
made illusory, as I have already informed you. Notwithstanding this, 
I continued it. Now I am in receipt of reliable reports of serious 
preparations for war on my eastern boundary also. Responsibility 
for the safety of my empire compels me to take counter defensive 
measures. I have carried my efforts for the maintenance of world peace 
to the utmost limit. It is not I that bear the responsibility for the 
calamity that now threatens the entire civilized world. Yet at this 
moment it lies in your power to stave it off. No one threatens the honor 
and might of Russia, which might have awaited the result of my 
mediation. The friendship for you and your empire which was 
bequeathed to me by my grandfather on his deathbed has always been 
sacred to me, and I have been faithful to Russia when she was hard 
pressed, especially in her last war. It is still possible for you to 
maintain the peace of Europe if Russia will decide to put a stop to the 
military measures that threaten Germany and Austria-Hungary. 

30 



Even before this telegram reached its destination the mobilization of the 
entire Russian fighting force, which had been ordered in the forenoon of the 
same day, openly directed against us, was in full swing. The Czar's telegram, 
however, was sent at 2 o'clock in the afternoon. 

After the mobilization became known in Berlin, the Imperial Ambassador 
at St. Petersburg was ordered on the afternoon of July 31 to advise the Russian 
Government that Germany had declared a state of war as a counter move 
to the mobilization of the Russian Army and Navy, which would have to be 
followed by mobilization unless Russia ceased her military preparations 
against Germany and Austria-Hungary within twelve hours, and so advise 
Germany. 

At the same time the Imperial Ambassador at Paris was directed to 
request an explanation from the French Government within eighteen hours 
as to whether, in the case of the Russo-German war, France would remain 
neutral. 

The Russian Government destroyed the painstaking mediatory work of 
the European State Chancelleries, shortly before its successful outcome, by 
her mobilization, which endangered the safety of the German Empire. The 
mobilization measures, concerning the seriousness of which the Russian Gov- 
ernment could not possibly entertain any doubts from the beginning, together 
with her continued denial, show clearly that Russia desired the war. 

The Imperial Ambassador at St. Petersburg delivered the message that had 
been given to him for Mr. Sazonof on July 31 at midnight. 

After the expiration of the time limit set for Russia without the receipt of 
an answer to our inquiry, his Majesty the Emperor and King ordered the 
mobilization of the entire German Army and the Imperial Navy at 5 p. m. on 
August 1. In the meantime the Imperial Ambassador at St. Petersburg had 
been instructed to hand a declaration of war to the Russian Government in 
case no favorable reply was issued before the expiration of the time limit. 
However, before a report regarding the execution of this order arrived, Rus- 
sian toops crossed our border and advanced on German territory, namely, as 
early as the afternoon of August 1. 

By this move Russia began the war against us. 

In the meantime the Imperial Ambassador at Paris put the question 
that he had been ordered to present before the French Cabinet at 7 p. m. on 
July 31. 

To this the French Prime Minister made an ambiguous and unsatisfactory 
reply at 1 o'clock in the afternoon of August 1. This does not give a clear 
picture of the French position, since it was limited to the statement that 
France would do what her interests seemed to warrant. A few hours later, 
at 5 in the afternoon, the complete mobilization of the entire French Army and 
Navy was ordered. 

On the morning of the following day France opened hostilities. 

Concluded on August 2, noon. 

Appendix I, 3. 
Belgian Diplomat Anent Germany's Efforts for the Maintenance of Peace.u* 

(Norddentsche Allgemelne Zeitung, Sept. 12, 1914.) 

On July 31 a letter was mailed in Berlin, bearing the following address: 

"Madame Costermans, 

107 Rue Froissard, 

Bruxelles, Belgique." 

Since as is known, a state of threatening danger of war was declared, on 
the same day. for the territory of the German Empire, on account of which 
the transmission of private mail to foreign countries was suspended, the letter 
in question was returned to the place of dispatch, viz., Berlin. There the letter 
was kept in the Dead Letter Department, and, after the expiration of the 
prescribed term, was opened by the competent postal authority in order to 
ascertain the name of the sender. It was found that inside the envelope there 
was a second envelope, bearing the following address: 

"Son Excellence Monsieur Davignon, 

Ministre des Affaires Etrangeres." 

Since this envelope did not bear the name of the sender any more than 
had the outside envelope, the letter was opened. It contained an official dis- 
patch of the Royal Belgian Charge d'Affaires at St. Petersburg, Mr. B. de 
l'Escaille, concerning the political situation in the said capital on July 30, 

IB Aktenstuecke zum Kriegsausbruch. S. 40, 42, 43. 

31 



which, In view of Its political Importance, was handed over to the German 
Foreign Office by the postal authorities. 

This dispatch reads: 

(TRANSLATION.) 
Belgian Legation, 

St. Petersburg. July 30, 1914. 

795/402. 

The political situation. 
Sir: 

Yesterday and the day before have passed in the expectation of events 
which were bound to follow Austria-Hungary's declaration of war against 
Servia. Such conflicting news was circulated that it was not possible to 
disentangle the true from the false concerning the intentions of the Imperial 
(Russian) Government. Only one thing is incontestible, and that is, that 
Germany has made efforts, here as well as In Vienna, to find some means of 
avoiding a general conflict, and that she has met, on the one hand, with the 
Vienna Cabinet's obstinacy not to yield one step, on the other hand, with the 
distrust of the St. Petersburg Cabinet toward the assurances of Austria- 
Hungary that she intended only to punish Servia and not to seize her territory. 

Mr. Sazonof has declared that it was impossible for Russia not to hold 
herself In readiness and not to mobilize; that, however, these preparations 
were not directed against Germany. This morning an official communication 
to the newspapers declares that "the reserves have been called to the colors 
within a certain number of provinces." However, whosoever knows of the 
reticence of Russian official "communiquGes," can boldly assert that the mobili- 
sation is general. 

The German Ambassador declared this morning that he was at the end 
of his endeavors at conciliation, which he has not ceased making since Satur- 
day, and that he scarcely entertained any more hope. I just hear that the 
British Ambassador has expressed himself to the same effect. Great Britain 
has recently proposed arbitration. Mr. Sazonof replied: "We have ourselves 
made such a proposition to Austria-Hungary, but she declined." To the pro- 
posal of a conference, Germany answered by proposing an entente between 
the Cabinets. One can really ask one's self whether everybody does not want 
war and is only trying to postpone its declaration a little in order to gain 
time. 

England commenced by making it understood that she would not let 
herself be drawn into a conflict. Sir George Buchanan said this openly. 
To-day, however, everybody in St. Petersburg is quite convinced — one has 
actually received the assurance — that England will stand by France. This 
support is of enormous weight and has contributed largely toward keeping the 
war-party above water. 

During the past few days the Russian Government has left free rein to 
all pro-Servian and anti-Austrian demonstrations, and has in no way attempted 
to check them. However, there were still differences of opinion within the 
Council of Ministers which met yesterday morning; the publication of the 
order of mobilization has, therefore, been retarded. But since then a change 
has set in, the war-party has obtained the upper hand, and at 4 o'clock this 
morning, the order for that mobilization was given out. 

The army, which believes itself strong, is full of enthusiasm and bases 
great hopes upon the enormous progress that has been made since the 
Japanese war. The navy is still so far removed from the realization of its 
plans of renewal and reorganization, that it can scarcely be counted upon. 
Just here lies the reason why the assurance of English support is of such 
great moment. 

As I had the honor to telegraph (T. 10) to you to-day, every hope of a 
peaceful solution seems past. That is the opinion of the diplomatic circles. 

For my telegram I used the route via Stockholm over the Nordlck cable, 
because this Is safer than the other. This dispatch I am entrusting to a 
private courier, who will mall it in Germany. 

Please accept, sir, the assurance of my most profound respect. 

Signed: B. de 1'Eseallle. 



32 



II. THE VIOLATION OF BELGIAN NEUTRALITY. 

A) The French Charges. 

One of the main charges made by different authors of the French book 
is that the Germans by their invasion of Belgium have violated the neutrality 
of that country. The very first essay quotes the "Croix" of January 24, 
1915: "We now know from Cardinal Mercier's letter that the treaty of 1839 
was signed on oath, and that the oath was binding on the successors of the 
signatories. One of them was the King of Prussia. Hence William II 
committed a hideous perjury when he broke the neutrality of Belgium. 

* * * If this is not an unjust war, then unjust wars do never occur. 

* * * For mere decency's sake and more so for the sake of Catholic morals 
the subjects of William II have no right to take part in the Kaiser's war 
in Belgium. "16 Again, Cardinal Mercier says in his pastoral: "Belgium 
was bound by honor to defend her independence, and she kept her word. 
The other Powers had bound themselves to respect and protect Belgian 
neutrality: Germany has broken her oath. England is loyal to it."if That 
is sufficient to characterize the gravity and violence of the charge. 

B) The German Answer. 

CARDINAL MERCIER takes things very lightly. He quotes Article 7 
of the Treaty (which was signed on April 19, 1839) on the indepen- 
dence and neutrality of Belgium,i8 and then passes the severe judg- 
ment which has been stated above. In reality and truth the matter is most 
complicated. The very conception of "Belgian neutrality" is ambiguous.19 
Belgium owes her existence and neutrality to the Great Powers, and not to 
her own strength. This fact demands primary consideration. The Congress 
of Vienna (1815) created the Kingdom of the Netherlands, which in the 
interests of the peace of Europe was to serve as a barrier against the 
expansive desires of France. The revolution of 1830 rendered Belgium 
independent, and the Great Powers imposed neutrality on the new State. 
By and by, the Powers joined the treaty, Holland only on April 19, 1839. 
On the same day the guarantee of the Powers was added. 

The original formula of Belgian neutrality guarantees the integrity and 
inviolability of Belgium, whilst the more recent and authoritative formula 
does not. Not only German scholars hold that opinion, but also, as Schulte 
proves,20 Ernest Nys,2i a Belgian Professor of Constitutional Law, whom 
the Belgian Government had delegated as Member of the International 
Arbitration Court. Dr. Nys wrote in one of his books, which was published 
in 1912: "En realite, la Belgique obtenait la garantie de la neutrality, mais 
les cinq puissances ne lui donnaient point la garantie de l'int6grite et de 



16 B. 24 and 25: "Nous savons maintenant, par la lettre du cardinal Mercier, que le 
traite de 1839 avait §t§ sign& sous la foi du serment, engageant, sous eette tn6me foi, les 
successeurs des slgnataires. Et le roi de Prusse ftait un de ceux-ia. II s'ensuit que Gulllanme 
II, violant la neutrality de la Belgique, e'est odieusement parjurS. . . . SI le cas de la 

guerre injuste ne s'appllque pas ici, 11 ne s'appliquera jamais Au regard de la 

simple honnStete, ft pins forte raison au regard de la morale cathollque, les sujets de Guillaume 
II n'ont pas le droit de coop§rer a la guerre du kaiser en Belgique." 

17 B. 24: "La Belgique 6tait engagee d'honneur a dgfendre son independence: elle a tenu 
parole. Les autres puissances s'fitaient engagees a respecter et a prot£ger la neutrality beige: 
l'AUemagne a voil6 son serment, l'Angleterre y est fidele." 

18 B. 234. 

19 Cf. Aloys Scuulte: Von der Neutralitat Belgiens. Bonn 1915. 

20 Schulte, Ibidem, p. 67. 

21 He iB also Doctor h. c. of tbe Universities of Edinburgh and Glasgow. 

33 



l'inviolabilite du territoire; elles avaient donne d'abord cette derniere gar- 
antie, puis elles l'avaient retiree. "'-- 

According to this view, the German invasion of Belgium is not a breach 
of neutrality, that is to say, not of the neutrality in general, but at best a 
breach of Belgian neutrality specifically. Other thinkers differ and derive 
integrity and inviolability from independence, because otherwise, they say, 
the word "independant" in the neutrality formula has no meaning. Dr. 
Nys, on the other hand, holds that the term "independant" merely implies 
the right of exercising sovereign rights. This opinion, which is also shared 
by Schulte,23 seems a justified definition. Why should the signatory Powers, 
whose foremost aim was to stem French ambitions, have wanted to bind 
their own hands? Prior to 1830, the right of occupation on the part of 
England and Prussia, the two nearest concerned Powers, had been expressly 
formulated. 

Schulte points out that the original Belgian neutrality was furthermore 
directed against France, and that all Belgian writers of any standing admit 
this.24 But in course of time the fortification system of Belgium was changed 
so radically that her neutrality lost its original character and aimed at 
Germany. Under such circumstances it is very doubtful whether one can 
still speak of neutrality. 

Moreover, in 1870, Gladstone concluded a treaty with Germany and 
France for the case of either belligerent violating Belgian neutrality. In 
that case, England was to be justified in coming to the other side's help. 
The treaty was of temporary validity and expired in 1872. Schulte shows 
that a French scholar, Albert Sorel, Colonel Ducarne (chief of the Belgian 
General Staff), and Professor Burgess, United States (Professor of Con- 
stitutional Law), are of the opinion that those treaties of 1870 prove that 
the original Belgian neutrality is no longer to be considered valid. 

Be that as it may, Belgium herself abandoned her neutrality, if it still 
existed. Proofs for this are overwhelming. 

In 1906, Belgium, together with England, elaborated technical details of 
common operations against Germany, based on a landing of English troops in 
French harbors. So it must bf presumed that negotiations with France had 
preceded. That assumption was corroborated when the French maps and 
plans according to which the armies were to be drawn up were discovered 
among the Belgian secret documents. 25 if that was merely, as is pretended, 
a precautionary measure for the hypothetical case of Germany breaking the 
neutrality, surely that neutrality would have demanded that Germany be not 
left in the dark. Another hypothetical case was much more likely to come 
true, viz, an Anglo-French invasion, and it was just as necessary to negotiate 
with Germany in view of such a case. 

Belgium had altogether surrendered herself into England's hands. The 
word "alliance" was scrupulously avoided, to be sure. Why, England and 
France had done the same. They called their agreements an "Entente 
Cordiale," yet that Anglo-French understanding has proved as strong as a 
formal alliance. The cover of the Anglo-Belgian agreements discovered in 
the Brussels archives bears the title "Conventions anglo-belges." Title and 
contents testify that those conventions were no mere conversations. 

Belgium was informed that England, in a Franco-German war, would 
even against the unll of Belgium, land troops prior to a German invasion, 
if England thought that invasion to be imminent. But Belgium seems 
quite unconcerned, and continues her negotiations. 

Belgium offered the British General Staff an opportunity and lent it 
practical aid, at least from 1909, so that the Staff might elaborate military 
manuals on Belgium. For England there were no longer any Belgian secrets. 

Belgium knew that France had taken her first measures of mobilization 
on July 27. The Belgian brigade of gendarmes at Frameries, a Belgian 



22 "in reality, Belgium obtained a guaranty of neutrality, but the five Powers did not 
guarantee her territorial integrity and inviolability. At first they gave the last mentioned 
guaranty, but later on withdrew it." 

23 Schulte, Ibid., p. 67. 

24 Schulte, Ibid., pp. 49-50. 

25 Cf. Appendix II, 3. 

34 



railway station, which is ten kilometers from the French border, informed 
the British Legation that the French officers were to join their troops in 
the afternoon, and that the station master of Feignies, a French locality three 
kilometers from the border, had been ordered to hold the railway cars 
ready for the transport of troops. The document stating this was found 
with Grant-Watson, Secretary of the British Legation in Brussels.26 

Belgium did not prevent French officers and men from crossing her 
western border27; she never complained about a breach of neutrality. She 
had broken her neutrality herself and was an active member of the Triple 
Alliance of England, France and Russia for better or worse. 

Of course, all these matters became known to be facts only after the 
Germans invaded Belgium. But they had been suspected before that, and it 
was well known, as the Imperial Chancellor's words of August 4th prove, 
that the enemy was prepared to cross the border. So it was a mere act of 
justified self-defense for Germany to forestall her opponents and march 
into Belgium. And such an act is ethically not objectionable, not even from 
the standpoint of Catholic morals. 

Professor Bonvin, a Jesuit Father of the Canisius College at Buffalo, 
appreciating the state of affairs at the time, has arrived at a verdict which 
justifies German invasion.28 He takes the right point of view that the same 
moral law guides private and public relations. His arguments begin with 
a simile: "A man suddenly notices wild, tearing beasts that threaten him 
from all sides. In front of him there is his neighbor's cornfield. If he 
runs across the other man's property, he might possibly be saved; otherwise 
he will probably be torn to pieces. In that dire necessity, is it proper and 
moral to trespass on the neighbor's property, even against the owner's willV 

Nobody will reply in the negative. In extreme cases, when self-preserva- 
tion requires it, natural law permits trespassing on alien property, and 
positive law follows suit. The German Civil Code (Buergerliche Gesetzbuch) 
declares in Paragraph 904: 

"The owner of any object is not entitled to stop another man's action 
regarding that object if such action be necessary in order to avert a present 
danger, and if the damage which threatens him is out of proportion to the 
injury which the owner suffers by that action, the owner can demand in- 
demnification for the damage done"%$ 

This Paragraph of the German Civil Code corresponds to the most 
exacting demands of Catholic morals. And the conception of state of 
distress and self-defense as recognized in civil law, is likewise accepted in 
international law. If the existence of a State is threatened, that State has 
a right to interfere with alien property, coupled with the duty to indemnify 
the injured party. 

Now the point is this: was Germany really threatened in her existence? 
Facts speak clearly for themselves. Three powerful States, England, France 
and Russia, rise against Germany. It must be expected that other States 
will join them. The opponents are inexorable and declare quite openly that 
they want to free the world from "German barbarism." Germany acts in 
self-defense, and in just self-defense. 

Germany could have carried her attacks south of Belgium across the 
borders of France, but would have bled herself to death in that strong belt 
of fortifications, or would at least have been long detained therein. During 
that time Russia might have pounced down on the Eastern provinces and 
taken Berlin. 

The condition of affairs was worse still. Germany had to presume that 
an Anglo-French army, disregarding the neutrality of Belgium, would march 
through Belgium and invade Germany. The discovery of the Brussels docu- 
ments was not necessary to arrive at that conclusion; there are many 



26 Aktenstuecke zum Kriegsausbruch, Berlin Auswaertiges Amt, S. 77-78. 

27 cf. Affidavits anent this fact as presented in the appendices. 

28 The very clear deductions of P. Bonvin have appeared in the Bnffalo Volksfreund of 
November 7, 1914, and of February 20, 1915. Cf. also same daily of March 3, 1915, and of 
April 5. 1915. 

29 The italics are the author's. 

35 



examples of a breach of neutrality in the history of England. In 1807, in 
the midst of peace, the English assailed neutral Copenhagen. In the Boer 
War their troops marched through a country, the neutrality of which they 
had guaranteed themselves, in order to attack the Boers in the back. In 
the present war, too, they dispatched their men, together with Japanese 
soldiers, through neutral Chinese territory against German Tsingtau, and 
destroyed the auxiliary cruiser "Kaiser Wilhelm der Grosse" in neutral 
Spanish waters, and the "Dresden" in neutral Chilean seas. (And lately the 
neutrality of Greece has been violated. — Ed.) 

Father Bonvin's parable does not cover the point entirely, because in 
the invasion of Belgium there is more at stake than proprietary rights. If 
the invasion had been merely a violation of such titles in self-defense, the 
German right of crossing Belgium should have had a corresponding feature, 
viz., Belgium's duty of permitting that crossing. What appears as right to 
the one side looks like a duty to the other. In that case, the Belgian resis- 
tance would necessarily appear as morally unjustified. But there is no one 
who would maintain that. Yet in view of the breach of neutrality com- 
mitted by Belgium herself and the consequences thereof, it is intelligible how 
the actions of the Belgian Government seem criminal to many men. 

If Germany had hesitated and waited, Anglo-French troops would have 
marched through Belgium. A German protest against the violation of 
Belgian neutrality would have been ridiculed and scoffed at. 

Hence the words of the German Imperial Chancellor, spoken on August 
4, 1914, are in accord with the strictest demands of moral law. He laid 
stress on the right of invasion under the then existing circumstances, and 
at the same time fully recognized the duty of indemnification. That was 
honestly spoken and not cynical, as Gaudeau says.3o. it is the dishonesty of 
the Belgian Government in the question of neutrality that has made all 
things worse for Belgium. 

C) Appendices to II. 

Appendix II, 1 contains the text of the original and of the definite version 
of the neutrality pact, as well as of its guarantee. 

Appendix II, 2 presents the extract from the Chancellor's speech held 
on August 4, which deals with Belgian neutrality. 

Appendix II, 3 gives a survey of what is contained in the Brussels 
documents, designated as "Intervention anglaise en Belgique." 

Appendix II, 4 contains a German translation of the letter of General 
Ducarne, which speaks of the Anglo-Belgian negotiations directed against 
Germany, to which are added two further notes. 

Appendix II, 5 gives official statements on ulterior documents bearing 
on the breach of neutrality by England. 

Appendix II, 6 gives statements made under oath bearing on the breach 
of Belgian neutrality by French troops before the Germans marched into 
Belgium. 

Appendix II, 1. 

1. The Original Neutrality Formula of January 20, 1831.31 

"La Belgique, dans lee limites . . formera un etat perpetuellement neutre. 
Les cinq puissances lui garantissent cette neutrality perpetuelle ainsi que 
l'lntegrite et l'inviolabillte de son territoire dans les limites mentionnees 
ci~dcssus. 

Par une juste reciprocity, la Belgique sera tenue d'observer cette meme 
neutrality envers tous les autres Stats, et de ne porter aucune atteinte a leur 
tranquillite interieure ni extSrieure." 

2. The Definite Neutrality Formula of October 15, 1831 (April 19. 1839).3i 

"Art. VII: La Belgique, dans les limites indiquees aux articles I, II et 
IV, formera un etat independent et perpetuellement neutre. Elle sera tenue 
d'observer cette meme neutrality envers tous les autres etats." 



ao b. 24. 

31 Cf. Schulte, S. 45 u. 65. B. 234. 



36 



3. The Guarantee of the Powers of April 19, 1839.31 

". . . promettent pour eux et pour leurs successeurs, sous la foi du serment, 
d&ccomplir et d'observer le dit traite en tous ses points et articles, sans y 
contrevenir ni permettre qu'il y soit contrevenu." 

Appendix II, 2. 

From the Speech of the Imperial Chancellor Before the German Diet, on 

August 4, 1914. 

.... Gentlemen, we are now acting in self-defence. Necessity knows no 
law. Our troops have occupied Luxemburg and have possibly already entered 
on Belgian soil. Gentlemen, that is a breach of international law. The French 
Government has notified Brussels that it would respect Belgian neutrality as 
long as the adversary respected it. But we know that Prance stood ready for 
an invasion. Prance could wait, we could not. A French invasion in our flank 
on the lower Rhine might have been disastrous. Thus we were forced to ignore 
the rightful protests of the Governments of Luxemburg and Belgium. The 
injustice — I speak openly — the injustice we thereby commit we will try to make 
good as soon as our military aims have been attained. He who is menaced as 
we are and is fighting for his All, can only consider the one and best way 
to strike. 

Appendix II, 3. 
From the Brussels' Documents I. 32 

(Norddeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung of Oetober 13, 1914.) 

.... From the contents of a portfolio which bears the title "Intervention 
Anglaise en Belgique" — English intervention in Belgium — it is clear that as 
early as 1906 the sending of an expeditionary force to Belgium in case of a 
Franco-German war had been arranged for. According to a report dated 
April 10, 1906, the chief of the Belgian general army staff, in collaboration 
with Lieutenant Colonel Barnardiston, at that time British military attache in 
Brussels, had, at the latter's instigation, in repeated conferences drawn up a 
detailed plan for the joint operation of an English expeditionary corps of 
100,000 troops with the Belgian army against Germany. The plan was approved 
by the chief of the English general staff, Major General Grierson. The Bel- 
gian general army staff was furnished with all the data concerning the 
strength and composition of the various parts of the British army, the compo- 
sition of the expeditionary force, the ports of debarkation, together with an 
exact computation with regard to the time of transportation, etc. On the 
basis of these data the Belgian general army staff had made careful prepara- 
tions for the transportation of the English troops into the Belgian line of 
defense, for their quartering and provisioning. The plans for this co-operation 
were carefully worked out to the last detail. For instance, a large number of 
interpreters and Belgian gendarmes were to be put at the disposal of the 
English forces and the necessary maps delivered to them. Even for the care 
of the English wounded provision had been made. 

Dunkirk, Calais and Boulogne had been decided upon as the points of 
landing for the British troops. From there they were to be brought by Bel- 
gian railways to the line of defense. The fact that it had been decided to land 
those troops in French ports and transport them through French territory 
proves that the English-Belgian arrangement had been preceded by an agree- 
ment with the French general army staff. Those three powers, then, had 
minutely determined the plans for a co-operation of the "allied armies," as 
they are termed in the document. The fact that a map for use in the French 
border mobilization was found in the secret archives also testifies to this.... 

Appendix II, 4. 
From the Brussels Documents 11.33 

(Norddeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung (Supplement) of November 25, 1014.) 

Letter to the Minister Concerning the Confidential Conversations. 

BRUSSELS, April 10, 1906. 
Confidential. 

Mr. Minister: 

I have the honor to report to you briefly about the conversations which I 
had with Lieutenant-Colonel Barnardiston and which have already been the 



32 Aktpnstueeke S. 58. (II., 3 comments on the documents.) 

33 Aktenstuecke S. 62-66. 

37 



subject of my oral communications. The first visit took place in the middle 
of January. Mr. Barnardiston referred to the anxieties of the General Staff 
of his country with regard to the general political situation, and because of 
the possibility that war may soon break out. In case Belgium should be 
attacked, the sending of about 100,000 troops was provided for. 

The Lieutenant-Colonel asked me how such a measure would be regarded 
by us. I answered him, that from a military point of view it could not be but 
favorable, but that this question of intervention was just as much a matter 
for the political authorities, and that, therefore, it was my duty to inform the 
Minister of War about it. 

Mr. Barnardiston answered that his Minister in Brussels would speak about 
it with our Minister of Foreign Affairs. 

He proceeded in the following sense: The landing of the English troops 
would take place at the French coast in the vicinity of Dunkirk and Calais, 
so as to hasten their movements as much as possible. A landing in Antwerp 
would take much more time, because larger transports would be needed, and 
because on the other hand the safety would be less complete. 

This admitted, there would be several other points to consider, such as 
railway transportation, the question of requisitions which the English army 
could make, the question concerning the chief command of the allied forces. 

He inquired whether our preparations were sufficient to secure the defense 
of the country during the crossing and transportation of the English troops 
— which he estimated to last about ten days. 

I answered him that the places Namur and Liege were protected from a 
"coup de main" and that our field army of 100,000 men would be capable of 
intervention within four days. 

After having expressed his full satisfaction with my explanations, my 
visitor laid emphasis on the following facts: (1) that our conversation was 
entirely confidential; (2) that it was not binding on his government; (3) that 
his Minister, the English General Staff, he and I were up to the present, the 
only ones informed about the matter; (4) that he did not know whether the 
opinion of his Sovereign has been consulted. 

In a following discussion Lieutenant-Colonel Barnardiston assured me 
that he had never received confidential reports of the other military attaches 
about our army. He then gave the exact numerical data of the English forces; 
we could depend on it, that in 12 or 13 days 2 army corps, 4 cavalry brigades 
and 2 brigades of horse infantry would be landed. 

He asked me to study the question of the transport of these forces 
to that part of the country where they would be useful, and he promised to 
give me for this purpose details about the composition of the landing army. 

He reverted to the question concerning the effective strength of our field 
army, and he emphasized that no detachments should be sent from this army 
to Namur and Liege, because these places were provided with garrisons of 
sufficient strength. 

He asked me to direct my attention to the necessity of granting the Eng- 
lish army the advantages which the regulations concerning the military requi- 
sitions provided for. Finally he insisted upon the question of the chief com- 
mand. 

I answered him that I could say nothing with reference to this last point 
and promised him that I would study the other questions carefully. 

Later on the English Military Attache confirmed his former calculations: 
12 days would at least be necessary to carry out the landing at the French 
coast. It would take a considerably longer time (1 to 2% months) to land 
100,000 men in Antwerp. 

Upon my objection that it would be unnecessary to await the end of the 
landing in order to begin with the railway transportations, and that it would 
be better to proceed with these, as soon as the troops arrived at the coast, Lieu- 
tenant-Colonel Barnardiston promised to give me exact data as to the number 
of troops that could be landed daily. 

As regards the military requisitions, I told my visitor that this question 
could be easily regulated. 

The further the plans of the English General Staff progressed, the clearer 
became the details of the problem. The Colonel assured me that one-half of 
the English army could be landed within 8 days; the rest at the conclusion of 
the 12th or 13th day, with the exception of the Horse Infantry, which could 
not be counted upon until later. 

In spite of this I thought I had to insist again upon the necessity of know- 
ing the exact number of the daily shipments, in order to regulate the railway 
transportation for every day. 

The English Military Attache conversed with me about several other 
questions, namely: 

(1) The necessity of keeping the operations secret and of demanding 
strict secrecy from the Press; 

(2) The advantages, which would accrue from giving one Belgian officer 
to each English General Staff, one interpreter to each commanding officer, and 
gendarmes to each unit of troops, in order to assist the British police troops. 

38 



In the course of another interview Lieutenant-Colonel Baruardistoii and I 
studied the combined operations to take place in the event of a German offen- 
sive with Antwerp as its object and under the hypothesis of the German troops 
marching through our country in order to reach the French Ardennes. 

In this question, the Colonel said he quite agreed with the plan which I 
had submitted to him, and he assured me also of the approval of General Grier- 
son, Chief of the English General Staff. 

Other secondary questions which were likewise settled, had particular 
reference to intermediary officers, interpreters, gendarmes, maps, photographs 
of the uniforms, special copies, translated into English, of some Belgian regu- 
lations, the regulations concerning the import duties on English provisions, 
to the accommodation of the wounded of the allied armies, etc. Nothing was 
resolved on as regards the activity which the Government or the Military 
authorities might exert on the Press. 

During the final meetings which I had with the British Attache, he informed 
me about the numbers of troops which would be daily disembarked at Boul- 
ogne, Calais and Cherbourg. The distance of the last place, which is necessary 
for technical considerations, will involve a certain delay. The first Corps 
would be disembarked on the 10th day, and the second on the 15th day. Our 
railways would carry out the transportation so that the arrival of the first 
Corps, either in the direction of Brussels-Louvain or of Namur-Dinant, would 
be assured on the 11th day, and that of the second on the 16th day. 

I again, for a last time, and as emphatically as I could, insisted on the 
necessity of hastening the sea-transports so that the English troops could be 
with us between the 11th and 12th day. The happiest and most favorable 
results can be reached by a convergent and simultaneous action of the allied 
forces. But if that co-operation should not take place, the failure would be 
most serious. Colonel Barnardiston assured me that everything serving to 
this end would be done. 

In the course of our conversations, I had occasion to convince the British 
Military Attache that we were willing, so far as possible, to thwart the move- 
ments of the enemy and not to take refuge in Antwerp from the beginning. 

Lieutenant-Colonel Barnardlston on his part told me that, at the time, he 
had little hope for any support or intervention on the part of Holland. At 
the same time he informed me that his Government intended to transfer the 
basis of the British commissariat from the French coast to Antwerp as soon 
as all German ships were swept off the North Sea. 

In all our conversations the Colonel regularly informed me about the 
secret news which he had concerning the military circumstances and the situ- 
ation of our Eastern neighbors, etc. At the same time he emphasized that 
Belgium was under the imperative necessity to keep herself constantly 
Informed of the happenings in the adjoining Rhinelands. I had to admit that 
with us the surveillance-service abroad was, in time of peace, not directly in 
the hands of the General Staff, as our Legations had no Military Attaches. 
But I was careful not to admit that I did not know whether the espionage 
service which is prescribed in our regulations, was in working order or not. 
I consider it my duty to point out this position which places us in a state 
of evident inferiority to our neighbors, our presumable enemies. 

Major-General, Chief of the General Staff. 
Signature. 

Note. When I met General Grierson at Compiegne, during the manoeuvres 
of 1906, he assured me the result of the re-organization of the English army 
would be that the landing of 150,000 would be assured and, that, moreover, 
they would stand ready for action in a shorter time than has been assumed 
above. 

End of September, 1906. Signature. 

An annotation affixed to the document says: "L'entr6e des Anglais en 
Belgique ne se ferait qu'apres la violation de notre neutrality par l'Alle- 
magne." (The entry of the English into Belgium would take place only 
after the violation of our neutrality by Germany.) Notes found in the Bel- 
gian Ministry of the Exterior make the meaning of this more clear. The notes 
refer to a conversation which a successor of Lieutenant Barnardiston, the Eng- 
lish military attache at Brussels, Lieutenant Bridges, had with the chief of the 
Belgian general staff, General Jungbluth. The document dated April 23, pre- 
sumably 1912, has been marked "confidentielle" by Count van der Straaten, 
director in the Belgian Ministry of the Exterior, and reads as follows: 

"Confidential. 

"The British Military Attache asked to see General Jungbluth. The two 
gentlemen met on April 23rd. 

"Lieutenant-Colonel Bridges told the General that England had at her 
disposal an army which could be sent to the Continent, composed of six 
divisions of infantry and eight brigades of cavalry — together 160,000 troops. 
She has also everything which is necessary for her to defend her insular ter- 
ritory. Everything is ready. 

"At the time of the recent events, the British Government would have 

39 



immediately effected a disembarkment in Belgium (chez nous) even if we had 
not asked for assistance. 

"The General objected that for that our consent was necessary. 

"The Military Attache answered that he knew this, but that — since we were 
not able to prevent the Germans from passing through our country — England 
would have landed her troops in Belgium under all circumstances (en tout 
etat de cause). 

"As for the place of landing, the Military Attache did not make a precise 
statement; he said that the coast was rather long, but the General knows that 
Mr. Bridges, during Easter, has paid daily visits to Zeebrugge from Ostende. 

"The General added that we were, besides, perfectly able to prevent the 
Germans from passing through." 

Appendix II, 5. 
From: "New Documents Anent England's Breach of Neutrality."34 

(Norddeutscbe AUgemeine Zeitung of December 2, 1914.) 

Recently our troops captured several secret military 
handbooks entitled "Belgium, Road and River Reports, Prepared by the Gen- 
eral Staff, War Office." We are in possession of four volumes of this hand- 
book, of which volume I was printed already in 1912, volume II In 1913, volume 
III (in two parts) and vol. IV in 1914. 

They show the following imprint: "Confidential. This book is the prop- 
erty of the British Government and is to be used for the personal information 

of who himself is responsible for the safe-keeping of 

the book. The contents are to be revealed to authorized persons only." 

The handbooks contain by reason of military investigations the minutest 
and most exact descriptions of the territory. 

Thus for instance in volume I, page 130 and following the great highroad 
Nieuport — Dixmuide — Ypres — Menin — Tourcoing — Tournai is rescribed and ac- 
companied by maps, with special regards to quality of the roads, the surround- 
ing country, tactic considerations, observation posts and water conditions. In 
this discussion all the villages along the highroad are enumerated and described. 
Thus we find their exact distance from one another, detailed descriptions of 
the road-net with reference to elevations, bridges, crossings, telephone and 
telegraph stations, railway stations including length of platforms and landing 
places, branch-lines, oil tanks, etc. — It is always mentioned whether the popu- 
lation speaks partly or all together French. .... 

To the book are added: 

(1) A schedule containing information about communities and villages 
for purposes of billeting; furthermore instructions regarding transportation 
and all other items which may be needed by the local commander; 

(2) A number of important hints to aviators for that part of Belgium 
which is situated south of the line Charleroi — Namur — Liege, as well as for 
the surroundings of Brussels. 

This very carefully and comprehensively drawn up memorandum is sup- 
plemented by a map showing the landing places; it bears the inscription 
"secret" and is dated July 1914. 

The manuals therefore prove a minute preparation, carried on during tbe 
last five years, for a campaign in Neutral Belgium. They are nothing else but 
secret regulations of military service for an English army fighting in Belgium. 
The English General Staff, therefore, have long time since prepared themselves 
for this event and have foreseen the same so surely that they undertook the 
painstaking work of compiling these military handbooks. 

Without ready and far-reaching assistance on the part of the Belgian Gov- 
ernment and military authorities such a work would not have been possible. 
Those strategical and tactical reports, going into the minutest details, as men- 
tioned above, or such exact data concerning railroads and transportation serv- 
ioe, rolling stock, locks and bridges could not have been obtained in any other 
way. The schedules about the billeting capacity, which are dealing with Bel- 
gium as if she were English territory could only be derived from the Belgian 
Government. Without doubt official Belgian material has been used. 

Appendix II, 6. 

Statements Under Oath Regarding the Breach of Belgian Neutrality by 

France Before the German Invasion.^ 

1. Statement of a German Sub-Corporal (Gefreiter). 

"Before the outbreak of the war I resided in Belgium altogether for about 
six years, and made my living as an itinerant tradesman and as a workman. 



34 Aktenstuecke S. 75 u. 76. 

35 Taken from: Grasshoff, The Guilt of Belgium (Belgiens Scuuld). Berlin, Reimer, 1915. 
P. 14-20. The statements are official and given under oath. 

40 



During this time I was also repeatedly in France, altogether probably half a 
year. Once I also went to England for about a month on business matters. 
Now during the week before the outbreak of the war I made the following 
observations: 

"I. On Sunday, July 26th, 1914, I went to church in Brussels about Ave 
or six kilometers distant from my home in Boitsfort. After church I saw three 
foreign officers walking along together on the Boulevard Ansbach. Two of 
them, I positively know, were French officers and one English. So far as I was 
able to judge in passing, and then from looking behind, the French officers 
were artillerists. They wore black coats and black trousers, the latter with 
red stripes and a blue one between. Their caps were red with two bands of 
gold braid. The caps correspond with plate XII of the 'Brief compilation con- 
cerning the French Army,' which has been placed before me, only they were 
bent over somewhat in the back. Coat and trousers resembled the illustration 
on Plate X, only according to my idea they were not dark blue, but black. I 
recognized the English officer by the tall cap and the braid on the forearm. 
His uniform was a greenish-gray and corresponded with the illustration on 
Page 33 of the "Brief compilation concerning the English Army.' I cannot tell 
to what troop the Englishman belonged. Neither am I able to state to what 
regiments the three officers belonged. All three officers wore leggings and 
spurs. A doubt is not possible, as I know the uniforms of the armies here in 
question. 

"II. On Wednesday, July 29th, I saw French soldiers singly and in groups 
walking along the Boulevard Militaire, towards the artillery depot. I counted 
eight men in all. As the soldiers walked to the artillery depot and as the Bel- 
gians standing around stated that these were French artillerymen, I assumed 
that the soldiers belonged to this branch of the service. There were no officers 
among them. The regiment to which they belonged is unknown to me. The 
men wore dark blue coats, red trousers, caps with a red top, blue beneath. 
They wore leggings, no spurs and no side-arms, but did carry knapsacks. 
Now that the 'compilation' has been placed before me, I declare that the uni- 
form corresponded with Table III in 1, but not with Table X in 2. 

"III. During the days from July 29th to August 2nd I saw aeroplanes 
flying every day over Boitsfort in the direction of Antwerp. They were bi- 
planes, according to my judgment French. I assume this because in 1910 during 
the aviation meet at Brussels I saw many French aeroplanes, because at that 
time no Belgian aeroplanes flew at all, and because they approached from the 
direction of Charleroi over the forest. I cannot state any other marks of 
distinction. I mention, however, that I know the difference between French 
and German aeroplanes very well today, and that I certainly am positive that 
these were not German machines. The aeroplanes flew at an elevation of about 
2,000 meters." 

2. Gustave Cochard, from Rimogne, active soldier in the 28th French regi- 
ment of dragoons, states under oath: 

"On July 31st, 1914, at 10 a. m., the two regiments of dragoons, the 28th 
and the 30th, garrisoned at Sedan, proceeded into the field. At first they rode 
together in France, along the state highway to Mouzon, where they arrived 
about noon. In the afternoon, between about two and two-thirty, there arrived 
from a different direction, in the village of Mouzon, four cannon of the 40th 
French artillery regiment, garrisoned in Meziers-Charleville, together with 
munition wagons, whereupon tne two regiments of dragoons, the 28th in the 
lead, then the guns and following them the 30th regiment of dragoons, started 
out, at first again in the direction towards Sedan. 

"The dragoons rode four abreast, without guards. The 3rd troop of the 
3rd squadron, to which I belonged, rode furthest in advance. I rode in the 
fourth file, and therefore was able to see everything that went on at the head 
of the detachment. 

"When the detachment had arrived near the French village of Bazeilles, 
on the Mouzon-Sedan road, it suddenly turned towards the north and proceeded 
via La Chapelle to the Belgian frontier. The Belgian-French frontier was 
crossed on July 31st, 1914, at about nine o'clock in the evening, or a little 
later, on the La Chapelle-Bouillon road, by the two French regiments of dra- 
goons and the French battery 

"Lieutenant Malespieux, commanding my troop, rode at the head. On the 
spot where the La Chapelle-Bouillon road crosses the French border a Belgian 
brigadier and four Belgian gendarmes, on horseback, who were without diffi- 
culty recognizable as such by their uniforms, reported to him. The brigadier 
and the four gendarmes were waiting at this point when we arrived there. 
These five members of the gendarmerie then proceeded at the head and thus 
led the detachment to the city of Bouillon, located three miles from the 
French border on Belgian soil. A short distance from Bouillon, the 30th regi- 
ment of dragoons parted from the detachment in order to take quarters near 
Bouillon on Belgian territory, so that only the 28th regiment of dragoons and 
the battery entered Bouillon on July 31st, 1914, about ten o'clock in the evening. 
The head of the regiment stopped in the city before the office of the Burgo- 
master. Captain Lainez, commanding my squadron, entered the building. After 
some time — it may have been an hour — a municipal functionary brought from 
the Burgomaster's office the assignments for the 28th regiment of dragoons 
and the battery, which was still standing in the street before the Burgo- 
master's office. I then proceeded with about thirty other dragoons to my 
quarters, a barn within the city. 

41 



"The night from July 31st, 1914, to August 1st, 1914, therefore, was spent 
by the 28th French regiment of dragoons and the French battery, in the Bel- 
gian city of Bouillon, while the 30th regiment of dragoons also was quar- 
tered on Belgian soil nearby. The reception on the part of the Belgian popu- 
lation was in no way antagonistic, but on the contrary very friendly. 

"After the morning inspection Lieutenant Malespieux, together with twen- 
ty-five dragoons, I among them, left, as a patrol, in an easterly direction, before 
six o'clock in the morning. Now in a walk, now in a trot, we proceeded along 
the state road from Bouillon to Arlon, towards the east, constantly on Belgian 
soil. The ride of this patrol led from Bouillon on this state road through the 
Belgian towns of St. C6cile, Chassepierre, Florenville, Pin, St. Vincent, Belle 
Fontaine, St. Marie to St. Laurent, which lies toward Arlon and is more than 
forty kilometers distant from Bouillon. Therefore, on August 1st, 1914, more 
than forty kilometers were covered in an easterly direction, exclusively on 
Belgian soil. The officers' patrol, twenty-five men, arrived at St. Laurent after 
nine o'clock in the evening. Lieutenant Malespieux rode according to the map; 
on the way he did not send out any smaller patrols. About an hour later, the 
entire 28th regiment of dragoons and the French battery arrived in St. Laur- 
ent. The men stated that they had followed on the same road along which 
the patrol had proceeded. They had ridden together with the 30th regiment 
of dragoons and the French battery up to within a short distance of St. Laur- 
ent, in the neighborhood of which the 30th regiment of dragoons parted 
from the rest of the column and proceeded to a Belgian village situated a few 
kilometers distant from St. Laurent. The two regiments of dragoons and the 
battery therefore proceeded on August 1st, 1914, more than forty kilometers 
into Belgian territory. 

"When I, on August 1st, together with the officers' patrol of twenty-five 
men, was riding along the Bouillon-Arlon road, this patrol, at the Bouillon- 
Florenville crossing, passed a country road which crosses the Bouillon-Floren- 
ville state road in the open field. According to my recollection, about 500 
meters beyond this crossing, there is a village through which we rode, situ- 
ated more than five kilometers from Florenville. To the right of the state 
road, three French cavalry regiments were standing as we were passing this 
crossing point of the two roads. The men called out to us that they were the 
Third and Sixth French cuirassiers, and the Fourth French regiment of hussars. 
As we passed, the three French cavalry regiments were set in motion and 
followed the patrol for several hours. The three cavalry regiments which we 
had met probably in the earlier hours of the afternoon of August 1st, 1914, at 
the road-crossing on Belgian soil, and which had followed us on Belgian soil 
for several hours, turned to the left a considerable number of kilometers, it 
may have been ten, after riding through Florenville, and therefore entered 
still more deeply into Belgium. 

"Every doubt concerning the fact that the two regiments of dragoons and 
the battery crossed the Belgian frontier on the evening of July 31st, 1914, and 
remained at least the entire following week uninterruptedly on Belgian terri- 
tory, is excluded for the following reason: 

"On about July 20th, 1914, I had entered a request for a'fourteen days' 
furlough to my home, Rimogne, and this had been granted and was to begin 
on August 1st, 1914. On the evening of July 30th, 1914, nothing was known 
of the mobilization, and I was of the opinion that on August 1st, 1914, I 
would be able to go home for the fourteen days. The physical inspection, to 
which every French soldier must submit before he goes on furlough, was 
ordered for the morning of July 31st, 1914. Instead of meeting the physician 
on July 31st, 1914, and going on furlough on August 1st, however, on July 31st, 
1914, I was obliged suddenly to proceed to the field. That has impressed itself 
on my memory indelibly. I repeat that every doubt regarding my dates is 
out of the question." 



42 



in. THE METHODS OF WARFARE. 
A) The French Charges. 

So abundant is the material collected in the book of the French Catholics 
that a brief survey of the attacks in this chapter is very difficult indeed. 
Shall we deal with particular cases, or confine ourselves to the general 
charge? In the latter case, shall we formulate that charge from the war 
letters of the Archbishop Mignot36 or from the pastoral of Bishop Gibier37 or 
from the answer of the Catholic University of Paris?38 Or shall Francois 
Veuillot39 be our guide through that chamber of horrors in the book over 
the entrance to which we read the announcement: "War against Churches 
and Priests"? It is quite impossible to enter into all the details here. All 
we can do is to point to the bold outlines of the terrible picture. Terrified, 
Mignot exclaims: "What happens under our own eyes takes the mind back 
to the times of Sargon, Sennacherib, Nebuchadnezzar and other hideous 
tyrants of Assyria and Chaldea, or not to go quite so far back, in the ages 
of Attila, Timur and Mohammet II. "40 Veuillot has diligently condensed 
In a single terrific charge whatever accusations Grondijs4i, Melot42, 
Bedier43, Nothomb 4 * had hurled against the German warfare. And the 
album presents the corresponding illustrations. 

According to the French account the campaign in Belgium and France 
assumes in Belgium the form of a religious war. Germany purposely sends 
her Protestant regiments west. Systematically churches are desecrated and 
destroyed, innocent priests are ruthlessly shot, nuns are tormented, threat- 
ened, outraged and killed, wounded soldiers are murdered, hospitals and 
members of the Red Cross are shot at. All is done with full forethought and 
without any cause. The Germans do not even find anything immoral in it, 
because it is one of their maxims that might is right, and they show an 
absolute and fierce contempt for the incontestable laws of war and the most 
soundly established principles of humaneness (humanity?). "45 These are 
the concluding sentences of Veuillot calling as witness Bishop Turinaz: 
"Monseigneur Turinaz therefore is right in saying that the German War 
not only leads to the destruction of the Catholic Church, its authority and 
doctrines, but also to the destruction of every human law and right, of all 
morals and principles which guide mankind."46 Therefore, when the Ger- 
mans invoke the Divine blessing on their arms, they crown their "anti- 
religious works by the worst kind of insult to the Divine Author of re- 
ligion.'^ 



36 B. 267, seq. 

37 b. 277. 

38 B. 282, seq. 

39 La Guerre aux Eelises et aux Prfitres. . . B. 81-140. 

40 B. 266: "Mais, a voir ce qui se passe sous nos yeux, on se croirait revenu au temps 
des Sargon, des Sennacherib, des Nabuchodonosor, et autres Cpouvant'ables tyrans de l'Assyrie 
et de la Chaldge, ou, si vous trouvez ces temps trop Gloignes, a cenx d' Attila, de Tamerlan, de 
Mahomet II." 

41 Les Allemands en Belgique, Paris, Berger-Leurault, 1915. 

42 Le Martyre du ClergS beige, Paris. Bloud & Gay, 1915. 

43 Les Crimes allemands, Paris. Armand Colin, 1915. 

44 Les Barbares en Belgique, Paris. Perrin, 1915. 

45 B. 1S9: ". . . . mfepris fGroce et absolu des lois les plus incontestGes de la guerre 
et des principes les plus certaines de l'humanlteV' 

46 B. 140: "Msgr. Turinaz a done raison lorsqu'll afflrme que la guerre allemande aboutit 
tout droit, non seulement, 'a la destruction de l'Eglise catholique, de son autoritfi et de sea 
doctrines,' mats encore, '& la destruction de toutes les lois, de tous les droits, de toute la 
morale, de tous les principes dont vit l'humanitg tout entifire' " 

4T B. 140: ". . . . Us ne font que couronner leur besogne antireligieuse, d'un supreme 
outrage a l'Auteur de la religion." 

43 



B) The German Answer. 

t?T seems strange that even the episcopal pastorals cannot resist the 
I temptation to deal at length with supposed German atrocities so as to 
■^ excite the imagination of the faithful to the utmost. Are those pas- 
torals not bound to provoke thoughts of hatred, which, under favorable 
conditions, are converted into deeds of hatred — deeds that injure irretrievably 
first the opponent and then, owing to his reprisals, their own ill-advised 
people? Thus the terrible consequences of the war are not relieved 
or restricted but rather rendered more horrible. The cause of peace and 
conciliation is not served in this manner. 

German Catholics deeply sympathize with unhappy Belgium and her 
severely-tested bishops, especially with Cardinal Mercier of Malines. It was 
due to the conditions at the outbreak of the war that the Belgian population 
experienced the hard and terrible consequences of a modern war. We 
can well understand that the Cardinal's pastoral had to take those conse- 
quences into account. Yet we exceedingly regret that it contains passages 
which could not but have an inflaming effect, although that was not the 
Cardinal's intention. The fiery passion in the hearts of the faithful was 
not extinguished by that pastoral, but rather received additional fuel. The 
number of attacks made on Germany and the enumeration of the priests 
who, in the Cardinal's opinion, were innocently slaughtered, could not 
heal the wound, but was bound to increase the bitter resentment of the 
people. Yet, the pastoral does not by any means go to the full length of some 
of the French episcopal pastorals. 

There was all the less need for the Belgian and French bishops to 
relate supposed German atrocities, since reports in the daily press and a 
flood of pamphlets had already done too much in that direction. 

It would be absurd to deny that the furies of war never demanded inno- 
cent victims. Bedier is under a grave misapprehension when he says: 
"Yes, such is war, but war as Marceau's soldiers never waged and Joffre's 
men will never wage. Never has France, mother of arts, arms and laws, 
been engaged in such a war nor will she ever be."48 Bad things occur even 
in times of peace, not only amongst the Germans, but even more among the 
French. Vile acts which must be disapproved, others which must be branded, 
will happen even oftener in times of war. At all events Germany has a 
right to pride himself on having the best disciplined army in the world; no 
doubt, offenses occurred nevertheless. 49 The power of doing evil is deeply 
rooted in human nature since man is given a free will. His soul has a 
twofold ego: the one tries to lift him, and the other to drag him down. 
It rests with him to follow the one or the other. He need not be overcome 
by evil, but alas! too often he is conquered by it. 

It is just the same in war. In addition a man disposed to do wrong 
comes under the influence of war. According to his natural disposition and 
development one man will be morally improved and the other depraved. 
That commonplace truth holds good of all men at all times. Hence it is 
certain that crimes are committed in war. 

Moreover, in times of war, the soldiers in the territory to be occupied 
must work under continuous high nervous pressure. They have to face 
death in all forms and under all conditions. Scenes of horror surround 
them on every side. They have not much time to make up their minds; thus 
regrettable mistakes do happen. All the more in a country with different 
speech and customs. Offenses are liable to occur and can be understood, 
though they remain deplorable. 

Even miscarriage of justice cannot always be avoided. The countrymen 
of Captain Dreyfus should know that even in times of peace judicial errors 



*8 B6dier, 1. c. page 38: "Oui, c'est la guerre, mals telle que ne l'ont jamais faite les 
soldats de Marceau ni jamais ne la feront les soldats de Joffre, telle que jamais ne l'a faite 
ni ne la (era la France, mfire des arts, des amies et des lois." 

*9 "Unquestionably in every army there are some brutes who misconduct themselves, but 
the discipline of the German army, which is the most severe of any army in the world, un- 
doubtedly reduced the crimes of such brutes as it possessed to a minimum. . ." Anthony 
Arnoux, The European War. Boston, 1915. Pp. 73-77. 

44 



occur; how much more so in the restless and hurried times of war. Every- 
body must admit that in the administration of justice in war errors can 
happen. 

If individual soldiers should have committed crimes, if errors and 
mistakes should have been made, the Germans exceedingly lament and 
regret those occurrences, but they know that such grievous failings have 
their ultimate source in human frailty and insufficiency. Withal they do 
not defend wrongs. Any misdeed which is committed consciously and 
brought to the notice of the German authorities will be duly punished and 
expiated. 

The strongest protest is to be raised against the generalization which 
makes the whole German army and nation responsible for regrettable errors, 
failings, trespasses, or crimes committed by individuals. It is the worst 
kind of slander to allege that the entire German army is guilty; that 
systematic lust of blood incites Germans to atrocities; and that the Supreme 
Army Command and the whole German nation approve of those abomina- 
tions. And all that is maintained in the French indictment. 

The accused have the right of self-defense against such unjustified 
charges, and they use their good right even against the honorary presidents 
and the members of the committee by whose authority such falsehoods are 
published. Difficult as it is, they will not doubt the subjective truthfulness 
of all persons concerned. But they must insist on branding the preferred 
charges as untrue and unjust in an objective sense. 

They also repudiate the foolish notion that offenses such as the Germans 
have been accused of are impossible in the camp of the Allies. One has 
only to think of the savage hordes that are fighting in their ranks in order 
to know what is to be thought of such a presumptuous assertion. And even 
the native troops of the Allies have committed terrible things beyond and 
within their own borders. It may safely be asserted that no army in the 
world surpasses or even equals the German army in discipline. 

The means used to obtain reports about German military atrocities are 
most unsuitable. Commissions were appointed, who hastily and in a sur- 
charged atmosphere examined people of every station of life. The personal 
trustworthiness of the witnesses has not been taken into account at all; 
anybody who was ready to give evidence was accepted. Amongst the wit- 
nesses are people without any education, people of an over-excited mind 
who easily lose their balance and who could not possibly be impartial ob- 
servers, and people whose feelings were ablaze with a fierce hatred of 
Germany. y 

As early as August 7, the Belgian Minister of Justice constituted the 
Belgian Commission of Investigation. On the following day the papers 
notified the public of this fact, saying in conclusion: "The public is urged 
to report immediately to the Minister of Justice all cases of violation of 
the laws of nations committed by the Germans.50 It is self-evident that 
this let loose a veritable flood of rumors into Brussels, swelled by the pop- 
ulace, who thought thus to perform an act of patriotism. Harmless events 
or such as were the inevitable consequence of the war were misrepresented; 
some atrocities were wholly invented. For instance, the press reported 
with great circumstance that the drayman David Jordens in Sempst was 
ill-treated by some thirty German soldiers, and was forced to witness the 
abuse of his thirteen-year-old daughter, who was finally killed by her five 
or six "barbarian" tormentors, after which his nine-year-old son was bay- 
onetted and his wife shot. Only the arrival of Belgian soldiers, so the 
story went, saved the father from a similar fate. Also most young girls 
in Sempst were said to have been abused. 

On April 4, 1915, Municipal Clerk Paul von Boeckhourt, Burgomaster 
Peter van Asbroeck and his son, Louis van Asbroeck, were examined at 
Sempst under oath in order to clear up that story. They declare unani- 
mously that they do not even know the drayman David Jordens, that no 



M GraashofiT. S. 31. 

45 



man of that name lived in Sempst before the war, and that no woman and 
no child under fourteen years of age was killed at Sempst during the war. 

The rumor that the Vice Rector of the Louvain University, Monsignor 
Conraets, was shot has been kept up all the time. The Belgian Commission 
of Investigation, which must have known that he was alive, reports of a 
feigned execution. The report tells the following mysterious story: "The 
feigned execution of Monsignor Gonraets, Vice Rector of the University, and 
of the Dominican Father Schmit, took place before their eyes. A shot was 
fired, and the witnesses, convinced of the reality of the enactment, were 
compelled to applaud."°i The sham execution itself is very doubtful.52 it 
takes place before the eyewitnesses who, nevertheless, are "convinced of the 
reality of the act" and are "compelled to applaud." A hasty reader must 
get the impression that Conraets is dead. Not a word that he is still alive. 
Thus the legend is kept up.53 The same Commission has not found a single 
instance where civilians took direct part in the hostilities, and Veuillot 
appeals to that fact.54 Yet how different are the actual facts, substantiated 
as they are by documentary evidence, which will be found in the affidavits 
at the end of this chapter. 

The alleged atrocities of the Germans are nowhere represented in their 
causal nexus, but it is made out that the Germans, without any cause what- 
ever, rushed on their poor victims like wild wolves that attack innocent 
lambs. In a number of passages it is even claimed that franctireur warfare 
had no bearing on the actions of the Germans. The Germans rather are said 
to have subsequently invented the fiction of the franctireur war as an excuse 
for their abominations. But there is no doubt that franctireur war never 
in the history of the world was waged to such an extent as in the present 
war. This is proved by the documents of the White Book which the German 
Foreign Office has compiled. According to Germany's enemies nowhere on 
church towers were observation stations; nobody ever shot from those 
towers at the Germans; they destroyed the churches from a fierce hatred 
of religion. Only befogged fanatics can believe such grotesque distortions. 
Thoughtful readers will readily understand the attitude which the Swiss 
Federal Government took when the official French commission^ of investiga- 
tion spread reports of German atrocities in Switzerland. The Federal Gov- 
ernment made a sharp announcement, which speaks of the "poisonous seeds" 
sown by official France. 

It is an insult to the intelligence of readers to go on reporting that the 
Germans kill the wounded (achever les blesses). We can now understand 
why prisoners inquired with a trembling voice if and when they would be 
shot. The idea bad been so long suggested to their minds that it became 
almost an obsession with them. Yet any careful reader will remember that 
over 200,000 French prisoners of war are in Germany. Even a neutral, 
Professor Wernle of Basel56 has pointed to that circumstance in reply to 
Bedier's charge. Facts will always prevail against inferences, however 
subtle. 

Special value is attached to the diaries taken from German soldiers 
that were made prisoners of war. Indeed, they are most remarkable 
documents. Very pertinently Wernle points out, of what importance 
unabridged war diaries may be. "I should consider myself very fortunate," 
he says, "if I could get hold of such a German diary. And the more such 
war diaries come to our knowledge unabbreviated, the clearer our insight 
into the soldiers' psychology will be. Of course, we would have to guard 
against any generalization; the very individuality of such diaries would show 
us how differently each one views and pursues his gruesome military pro- 
fession. We would also have to bear in mind that even by such witnesses 



51 CinquiSme rapport, S. 71: "Un simulacre d'exGcution de Msr. Conraets, vice-recteur de 
l'Universite, et du pfire Schmit, de l'ordre des FrSres prgcheurs, eut lieu devant eux. Une salve 
retentit et les temolns, convalncus de la rgalitfe du drame, furent contraints a applaudir." 

52 Cf. Appendix III, 30. 

53 Cf. Appendices III, 20 and III, 21. 

54 B. 132. 

55 Deutsche Greueltaten in Frankreich. Paris. Chaix, 1915. 
66 Neue Zuercher Zeitung of April 18, 1915 

46 



we are informed of their conception of facts rather than of the facts them- 
selves. But at all events, we would get acquainted with real human beings, 
rude and vulgar fellows as well as refined and noble-hearted gentlemen, and 
while some of them might increase our contempt of mankind, others would 
reveal such heart-stirring traits of noble human nature as to inspire us 
with new faith."57 Bedier has perused forty soldiers' diaries, and has at- 
tempted to prove the German crimes on the evidence of German documents.58 
But how these documents are distorted by his pen! The same Wernle criti- 
cises the booklet forcibly and justly. He finds fault with the generalizations 
contained therein and based upon isolated cases; he shows that the writers' 
views are given, not the actual facts; he deplores that only extracts are 
offered dealing with atrocities, but that the coherent facts are withheld which 
would enable us to judge the merits of the testimony; he finds it strange that 
even parts of facsimilized texts are omitted so that the communicated facts 
are made to appear in an entirely different light; he comments on mis- 
understandings that "misinterpret a neutral text so as to give it a malicious 
and base meaning." Another neutral, the Danish Professor, Karl Larsen, 
also shows how unreliable a scholar Bedier is.59 He comes to the following 
conclusion: "I consider his pamphlet a sad piece of evidence of the fact that 
even with great savants not only knowledge will fail but that even such men 
are overcome by the blood surging to the brain so that they lose their clear 
vision and their methodically acquired faculties are led astray from the 
straight path of search for truth into the wilderness of passion." Still 
more severe is the judgment of H. Grimme, formerly a colleague of BSdier's 
at the University of Freiburg, in Switzerland. He says: "Bedier, the 
manuscript reader, has made many and grave mistakes in his reading; 
Bedier, the linguist, has everywhere given a meaning to German words and 
terms which is entirely at variance with the German use of those words; 
B§dier, the textualist, twists and distorts the plainest sentences of the 
originals until they seem to him to fit in with the tissue of his and his 
people's slanderous charges against Germany."60 in Bedier's hands the 
German diaries become indeed documents of German crimes, and in that 
transformation they are taken over into Veuillot's paper and thus they re- 
ceive the sanction of such authorities as bishops and even of Cardinal 
Amette, who writes in the foreword: "We can testify that the arguments 
and the facts which they" — the contributors to the French book — "state 
are entirely trustworthy."6i Most of the "facts," begging His Eminence's 
pardon, are contrary to truth, and the generalizations and inferences are 
altogether erroneous. It is neither truthful nor just to state that Germany, 
in accordance with her moral disposition, premeditated the destruction and 
desecration of churches, the murder of priests and monks, the outrage of 
nuns, the persecution, robbery and ruin of peaceful civilians. 

It seems very strange to German Catholics that the enemies unanimously 
accuse none but German soldiers of being atrocious. Formerly they 
mutually denounced each other as barbarians. The history of England, 
France, Belgium, Italy and Russia, more particularly the history of the 
Colonial wars carried on by those countries, abounds in all sorts of 
actual atrocities. The actions of Lord Kitchener in Egypt were the worst 
which any general possibly could have committed, and years ago the English 
press published in every detail Belgian and Italian atrocities and branded 
them with holy indignation. Now the former enemies have become friends, 
and everything is forgiven and forgotten! Now they fight shoulder to 
shoulder for "civilization" against German "barbarism." 

German warfare in Belgium was very hard, and was bound to be so 
because the Belgian franctireur war compelled the German army to take 



67 N. Z. Zeitung. (The italics are the author's.) 

58 Bedier, Les crimes allemands. P. 6: "Les crimes allemands, Je les etablirai par des 
documents allemands." 

59 Larsen, Prof. Bedier und die Tagebuecher deutscher Soldaten. Aus dem Daenischen von 
A. P. Colin, Berlin, Reimer. 1915. S. 48. 

60 Grimme, Ein boeswilliger Sprachstuemper ueber "deutsche Kriegsgreuel." Muenster, 
1915. S. 7. 

61 B. VI. 

47 



measures of self-defense. Our soldiers do not fight against the innocent 
inhabitants of foreign countries, particularly not against women and chil- 
dren. But they would have to sacrifice themselves if they wished to spare 
that civilian population which offends against international law and raises 
arms against them. In view of that fact, their self-defense was justified. 

It is untrue that Protestant regiments were purposely sent against the 
Catholic population of Belgium. Such regiments nowhere exist. There 
are regiments in which the number of Catholic soldiers is small. If such 
regiments are meant, it is still untrue that they were selected from the 
motives indicated. 

It is untrue that churches were fired at from mere hatred of religion. 
Of course, when a church served as a stronghold for the attacking civilians, 
when observation posts were established on the tower, when signals were 
given or machine guns were fired from there — it was self-evident that cannons 
had to do their deadly work. Besides all this, churches are always in danger 
when a town is being bombarded. It would be strange indeed if they re- 
mained intact. Wherever war is raging it would not but be destructive. 
If the theatre of war had been Germany instead of France and Belgium, it 
would be quite easy to get up an album with illustrations of ruined churches. 
The French album, therefore, does not prove anything. Furthermore, it 
should be borne in mind that the Anglo-Franco-Belgian army did not scruple 
to bombard their own churches whenever those sacred edifices were of mili- 
tary service to the Germans, or were believed to be so in the future. The 
Germans found English military manuals which declared church towers to 
be particularly good observation stations.®? 

If the destruction of churches and localities was systematic, how it is to 
be explained that Brussels, Antwerp, and numerous towns and villages did 
not suffer the same fate as the demolished quarters of Louvain and other 
ruined towns and villages? Wherever the population kept quiet no destruc- 
tion took place. So the unharmed localities and towns bear testimony 
against the others. 

The alleged looting by the Germans is largely due to the natives of 
Belgium, who behaved worse than savages. The retreating Belgians- 
French and English armies are responsible for other acts of plunder. Proof 
is abundant. The same holds good for France.64 

Veuillot devotes a whole chapter to the outrage of sisters (nuns). He 
concludes his statement by quoting Nothomb, to the effect that those "beasts 
with human faces"65 outraged girls and women, among whom were also 
nuns, and hints that Nothomb had delicately refrained from more drastic 
descriptions. The Governor-General of Belgium wrote to the Belgian bishops, 
and made inquiries. The bishop of Liege declared that in his diocese no 
nun had been outraged. The bishops of Namur, Ghent and Bruges likewise 
answered that within their bishoprics no outrage of any nun had come to 
their knowledge. The Archbishop of Malines and the Vicar Capitular of the 
bishopric of Tournay informed the Governor-General that they could not 
make any actual statements about any case of a nun having been outraged 
within their dioceses.^® 

With these statements before us, what are we to think of Veuillot's 
protestation: "Once more, words fail to give expression to our horror and 
disgust " 67 

Yes, indeed, our horror and disgust are beyond words that distinguished 
men like Veuillot can make such unsubstantiated charges. All that remains 
in that fearful list of horrors is limited to pardonable errors and individual 
misdeeds for which neither the army leaders nor the German nation can 
be held answerable. Nor should they be made responsible. Christianity 
demands that, but the whole tone and method of the book is un-Christian. 



62 Aktenstuecke S. 75. 

63 Cf. the letter of Prefect Hamels, concerning the looting In Malines on the part of Belgian 
soldiers, in Grasshoff, Belglens Schuld. Berlin, Reimer, 1915. S. 103-104. 

64 Cf. the Report: Die Laegentaktik des franzoesischen amtlichen Berichts ueber angebliche 
deutsche Pluenderungen. Berlin, 1915. Gedr. In der Reichsdruckerei. 

65 B. 123. 

66 Cf. Appendix III, 29. 

67 b. 123. "Encore une fol. les mots se derobent a l'horreur et an dfegoOt! . . ." 

48 



Unless German Catholics have altogether lost consciousness of the soli- 
darity of all Catholics on earth, and of mankind, the events in Belgium and 
the hard lot of Belgian Catholics must strike their hearts like blows with a 
hammer. The fact that twenty-six priests were killed in the diocese of 
Namur is quite staggering. Did the Belgian clergy take part in the military 
occurrences? Opinions are diametrically opposed on that point. Some say 
that the priests were innocent entirely and without exception. Others hold 
that those who were guilty in one form or another have been punished. A 
conclusive verdict on that question is not yet possible. 

But franctireur warfare, which likewise has been denied, is an estab- 
lished fact. That warfare necessitated German harshness in the conduct of 
the war. Civilians who were convicted, and even suspects, would have been 
a danger to the German army if they had been left behind in Belgium. That 
is why dozens of Belgian clergymen were taken to Germany. Some of them 
were proved to be quite harmless and innocent. The German bishops 
befriended them at once, and the writer of these lines tried to alleviate 
their lot. The writer does not know of a single case of one of those priests 
being condemned; everyone was acquitted. They were sent home as soon 
as conditions in Belgium were orderly again. All those measures of taking 
them to Germany would have been unnecessary if no franctireur war had 
taken place in Belgium. 

And today it may be maintained with certainty that it is untrue 
to say that not a single priest took part in the franctireur war. Evidence 
from witnesses on oath and court martial proceedings render it certain that 
quite a number of Belgian priests did take part in the franctireur war. 
Belgians themselves have told of clergymen who incited the people to attack 
the German troops, and who even shot at them. Often times guns 
and ammunition were found in the houses of the clergy .68 

When the German soldiers marched into Belgium, they thought that 
they were fighting against the armed force of the enemy. But the bullets 
that came flying from hedge and bush, from churches and church-towers, 
taught our soldiers that in many parts of Belgium there was no peaceful 
population. Self-defense against those franctireurs was indispensable, and 
the consequences for the German army and Belgian population were fearful. 
But the German soldiers nowhere took action unless franctireurs were 
shooting at them. They acted in justified self-defense, and not from an 
inbred lust of blood and systematic cruelty as the French book misrepresents 
them. The same men who set fire to one house, protect and save another. 
Poor Belgian people! Your own Government and a mendacious press have 
deluded you. How much blood and ruin could they have spared! Heavy 
is the guilt which burdens the consciences of your franctireurs. 

C) Appendices to III. 

Appendices to this chapter are bound to be more abundant, so as to 
enable the reader to obtain at least a general survey over the many and 
various accusations dealt with. It is well, however, to remember that the 
documents here given represent only a few individual cases of a typical 
character, taken from the vast amount of material at hand. 

Lest we become guilty of the fault of one-sidedness, and injustice, which 
attaches to the authors of the French indictment, it is well to know that 
the facts here given are not sufficient to draw therefrom a character sketch 
of our enemy, because they were selected only in view of our defense against 
attacks. Hence generalizations should be avoided. They are, alas, only too 
frequent on the opposite side, but not justified for that reason. The question 
at issue is to stigmatize the indictment of our enemy and not the opponent 
himself. 

The following thought prevailed in the selection: In the first place 
the object is to make it plain that the population in the western part of the 



Cf. Appendices III, 30 to 84. 

49 



enemy's country indulged in a wild war of snipers (franctireurs) against 
our troops, which was prepared a long time in advance, and was officially 
organized in the days of our invasion. 

There are certain school books used in France, on the cover of which is 
represented a woman shooting a general who is riding at the head of his 
troops. The motto that goes with it says: "Les femmes de France pendant 
la guerre" (The women in France during the war). The text, commenting 
upon the picture, is given in Appendix III, 1, with its translation into 
English. Thus is glorified the war of snipers; the dastardly assassination 
of an unsuspecting enemy is represented to the school children as something 
honorable and worthy of imitation. 

On August 5. 1914, a proclamation was addressed by the Belgian 
Minister of the Interior to the authorities of the Communes, which con- 
tained instructions on the paragraphs of the Constitution of The Hague 
bearing on the conditions when participation of the people in the war is 
permissible. The Belgian people, in those troublous times, could not but 
misinterpret the instructions, and took them in the sense of a war of snipers. 
It was only after this campaign became so disastrous for Belgium and after 
the hopes of English and French help were disappointed, that an official 
warning was issued against the war of snipers. Appendix III, 2, gives 
several passages from the ministerial circular, Appendix III, 3, the instruc- 
tion of the commissioner of the district of Brussels. Appendices III, 4, 21 
have reference to the Belgian war of snipers, Appendices III, 22-26 prove 
violations of the Geneva Convention by French troops. Appendix III, 27 
exemplifies the manner in which diaries of German soldiers were handled 
by Bedier. Appendix III, 28 brings proof that church towers were demol- 
ished by our enemies as well. The other appendices have reference to the 
crimes attributed to German soldiers, and to the participation of Belgian 
ecclesiastics in the campaign of sniping. 

Appendix III, 1. 
Jeanne Bernier. 6 ^ 

Combien d'actions glorieuses accomplies par nos Franchises, durant cette 
terrible guerre de 1870-1871, sont restees ignorees! Que d'heroines qui n'ont 
eu, quand elles ont survecu, d'autre recompense que la satisfaction de leur 
conscience! Combien sont tombees, inconnues de tous, pour ne jamais se 
relever! 

Jeanne Bernier fut une de ces heroines. 

A l'epoque de l'invasion, elle habitait une ferme en Champagne. Son 
frere venait d'etre tue par les Prussiens. Le pere, l'epoux et l'enfant, les 
trois autres hommes de la maison, s'armerent alors, s'engagerent parmi les 
francs-tireurs et flrent le coup de feu contre l'ennemi. 

Tous trois perirent. 

En apprenant cette nouvelle, Jeanne Bernier ne montra aucune douleur, 
ne versa aucune larme. 

II lui parut qu'elle avait mieux & faire qu'a se desoler. Elle decrocha 
le fusil de son frere, revgtit des habits d'homme, abandonna la maison et 
partit. 

Seule, elle se lanca, la nuit, dans des bois remplis d'ennemis toujours 
sur leur garde; seule, elle triompha de la fatigue, du manque de nourriture 
et de sommeil; seule, elle voulut ne pas succomber avant de s'Stre vengee. 

C'etait la une marque de courage peu commune chez une femme, n'est-11 
pas vrai? , . . 

Durant cinq jours, Jeanne Bernier erra a travers la campagne a la 
recherche des eclaireurs, de ces fameux uhlans qui terroriserent tant de 
villages, a la recherche des sentinelles ecartees. Quatre moururent de sa main. 

Elle se dit alors qu'elle avait assez fait pour sa famille et pour sa 
patrie et qu'elle pouvait rejoindre ses chers disparus. 

Un general ennemi s'avangait, chevauchant a la tSte d'une troupe de 
soldats, elle tira sur lui. Les Prussiens la tuerent d'une balle en pleine 

Est-ce que ce devouement ne merite pas d'etre cite en exemple? 

Imp. Paul Auguste-Godchaux u. Cie, 10, Rue de la Douane, Paris. 



69 Cf. Der Franktlreurkrleg in Belglen. Deutsche Verlagsanstalt. Stuttgart and Berlin. 
Appendix.— See also the Belgian People's War, New York, 1915; and Grasshoff, The Tragedy of 
Belgium, New York, 1915. 

60 



JEANNE BERNIER 

(Translation.) 

How many heroic deeds performed by our French women in the terrible 
war of 1870-71 have remained unknown. How many heroines, when they sur- 
vived, did not receive any other recompense than the satisfaction of their con- 
science! How many fell, unknown to everyone, never to rise again! 

Jeanne Bernier was one of these heroines. 

At the time of the invasion she lived in a farm-house in the Champagne. 
Her brother had just been killed by the Prussians. Her father, her husband, 
and her son, the three other men in the house, armed themselves, joined the 
franctireurs and fired at the enemy. 

All three perished. 

When she received this news, Jeanne Bernier did not manifest any sorrow, 
did not shed a single tear. 

It seemed to her that she had better things to do than to mourn. She took 
down her brother's gun, put on men's attire, left the house and set out. 

Alone, she went at night into the woods filled with the enemy always on 
their guard; alone, she triumphed over fatigue, lack of food and of sleep; 
alone, she did not wish to succumb before she had taken vengeance. 

Was that not a mark of rare courage for a woman? 

For five days, Jeanne Bernier wandered through the country on the search 
for scouts, for those notorious Uhlans who terrorized so many villages, on the 
search for scattered sentries. Four died at her hand. 

She felt then that she had done enough for her family and for her country 
and that she could join her beloved dead. 

A general of the enemy passed by, riding at the head of a troop of soldiers: 
she fired on him. The Prussians killed her with a bullet through her heart. 

Does not this self-sacrifice deserve to be cited as an example? 

Appendix III, 2. 

Extracts from the Circular Instruction of the Belgian Minister of the Interior 
to the Authorities of the Communes, August 5, 1914.70 

The German army penetrated into our country under violation of the 
Treaties that guaranteed our integrity. 

The Belgian government is determined to discharge the obligations con- 
tracted by these Treaties. It is making all preparations to use all means at 
Its disposal. 

In carrying out this work with the help of the army it has the certainty 
that all Belgians so much attached to their soil, their nationality, their inde- 
pendence and their king who personifies all this, will rally around him and will 
give him their enthusiastic support. 

The first care of the officials of Communes will be to enlighten their sub- 
jects on the duties which all owe to their country, and on the attitude to be 
assumed towards the army of invasion. 

If the population of a district not yet occupied by the enemy takes up arms 
at the advance of the enemy without having had thetime to accomplish a 
military organization, it will be treated as if in warfare, provided the arms 
are carried openly and the laws of war are observed. 

Wherever the foreign and Belgian troops come to a clash on the territory 
of a commune, the officials and the inhabitants are expected to give all possible 
help to the national army, but they will abstain from all individual and direct 
participation in the battling, an act that would expose them to harsher treat- 
ment than that meted out to soldiers. 

During the occupation the officials of municipalities will let no occasion 
pass without reminding their subordinates that these regulations of conduct 
have only the object of alleviating the burdens and sufferings consequent upon 
war and invasion, but they must not be considered as if approval were thereby 
given to the invasion, or as if they were freed from the obligation of loyalty 
to the legitimate government, which remains undiminished during the war. 

Appendix III, 3. 

Instruction of the Commissioner of the District of Brussels, Baron de Royer 
de Dour de Praule, August 6, 1914.71 

I have the honour of informing you that in the interest of national 
defense and of public order, a royal command of August 5th, .1914, has 
decreed the mobilization of the non-active garde civique of all municipalities. 
This citizen guard, therefore, now is charged with a task which Article I of 
the law of September 9th, 1897, bestows upon the active garde civique; to work 
for the maintenance of national independence and the inviolability of the state 
territory in the same manner, as for the maintenance of order and the laws. 



70 The complete French text is In Grasshoff, Belgians Schuld. Berlin. Relmer, 1915. 
S 97-102. 

71 Cf! Grasshoff, Belglens Schuld. Berlin, Relmer, 1915. S. 77, 78. 

51 



According- to Article II of the above-mentioned royal command of the 5th 
or this month, the men who form the garde civique, and are called to activity 
in future will carry openly the insignia: 

I. On the left arm a band with the national colors; 

II. On the headdress a cockade in the same colors. 

"For the moment, no weapons are being- distributed, as the soldiers must 
receive these first, therefore, arm the men as best you can and according to 
your judgment with unconcealed weapons." 

Appendix III, 4. 
From the Memorial of May 10, 1915."2 

Immediately after the outbreak of the war in Belgium a savage fight was 
started by the Belgian civilians against the German troops, a fight which was 
a flagrant violation of international law and had the gravest consequences for 
Belgium and her people. 

That fight of a population which was governed by savage passion raged 
throughout Belgium during the whole advance of the German army. When 
after obstinate fights the Belgian army receded before the German troops, 
the Belgian civilian population endeavored not only by all possible means to 
halt the German advance in those parts of the country which were still unoc- 
cupied, but even in places which had long been occupied by German troops the 
Belgian civilians did not shrink from damaging and weakening the German 
host by cowardly and treacherous attacks. . . . Overwhelming evidence 
has been collected which proves that on these marching routes and at these 
places the Belgian civilian population of every class, age and sex took part in 
the fighting against the German troops with the greatest bitterness and fury. 
This evidence is based on official statements, most of them made under oath, 
and on official reports; a selection of it is given in the appendix, which how- 
ever comprises only the more important events and which can at any time be 
amplified by further evidence. 

According to this evidence the Belgian civilian population has fought 
against the German troops at many places in the provinces of Liege, Luxem- 
burg, Namur, Hainault, Brabant, East and West Flanders. The fights at Aer- 
schot, Andenne, Dinant and Louvain assumed a particularly terrible character 
In these fights men of the most varied classes: workmen, manufactur- 
ers, doctors, teachers, even clergymen, nay, women and children were caught 
with arms in hand. ... In districts from which the regular Belgian 
troops had long withdrawn shots were fired on the German troops from houses 
and gardens, roofs and cellars, fields and woods. 

Irrefutable evidence proves that in a large number of cases the German 
troops at their entry were received with a semblance of friendliness by the 
Belgian civilian population, only to be attacked with arms at nightfall or at 
other opportune moments. Such cases particularly happened at Blegny, 
Fsneux, Grand Rosiere, Bievre, Gouvy, Vlllers-devant-Orval, Sainte-Marie, Les 
Bulles, Yschippe, Acoz, Aerschot, Andenne and Louvain. 

But what the Belgian civilians are especially to be charged with is the 
unheard-of violation of the customs of war. In different places, e. g., near 
Liege, Herve and Brussels, in Aerschot, Dinant and Louvain, German soldiers 
have been foully assassinated, although Article 23, section 1 b. of the Hague 
Regulations of Warfare on Land forbids to "kill or wound treacherously indi- 
viduals belonging to the hostile nation or army." Moreover, the Belgian popu- 
lation has disregarded the sign of the Red Cross, and thus offended against 
Article 9 of the Geneva Convention of July 6, 1906. Thus, Belgian civilians did 
not shrink from shooting under cover of this sign at the German troops and 
from attacking hospitals with wounded soldiers and the sanitarv staff, while 
in the execution of their duty. Finally it has been established beyond doubt 
that Belgian civilians plundered, killed and even shockingly mutilated German 
wounded soldiers, in which atrocities even women and children took part. 
Thus the eyes were gouged out of the German wounded soldiers, their ears, 
noses, finger-joints were cut off ... In other cases German soldiers 
were disemboweled, poisoned or strung up on trees; hot liquid was poured 
over them, or they were otherwise burned so that they died under terrible 
tortures. All these bestialities of the Belgian population are an outrage not 
only to the express obligation "to respect and care" for the sick and wounded 
of the enemy (Article 1, Section 1 of the Geneva Convention) but also to the 
primary principles of the laws of war and humanity. 

There can be no doubt that it is to a great extent the fault of the Belgian 
Government that the Belgian population conducted itself towards the German 
army against all international law. For leaving aside that a government is 
under all circumstances answerable for such acts as represent the general 
expression of the people's will, the Belgian Government has at least to bear 
the grave reproach that, although it could have prevented that franctireur 
war, it did not do so. It would certainly have been an easy matter for the 
government to give the requisite instructions to its organs such as mayors, 

na DIe voelkerr echtliche Fuehrung des belgischen Volkskrieges. Berlin. Auswaertiges Amt. 
S. 3-6. 

62 



soldiers and the "garde civique" in order to restrain the passionate excitement 
which had been artificially stirred up among the people. Therefore, the Bel- 
gian Government alone is responsible for Belgium's fearful guilt of blood. 

The Belgian Government has tried to evade this responsibility by putting 
the blame for the things that happened on the German troops whose lust of 
destruction is said to have made them commit violence without any provoca- 
tion. The Belgian Government has appointed a commission for the investiga- 
tion of the atrocities, alleged to have been committed by the German troops 
and it has made the findings of this commission a matter of diplomatic pro- 
tests. This attempt to pervert the facts into their reverse has failed entirely. 
The German army is accustomed to warfare only against hostile armies but 
not against peaceful inhabitants. That from the beginning of their entry into 
Belgium the German troops were forced by the native population into a defen- 
sive fight in the interest of self-preservation, this irrefutable fact cannot be 
put out of the world by any investigation of whatever commission. 

The tales of refugees compiled by the Belgian Commission which are rep- 
resented as the result of strictly impartial investigations, bear the stamp of 
untrustworthiness, if not of malicious distortion, on their face. Considering 
the circumstances, the commission cannot possibly test the correctness of 
rumors reported to them, or see the interrelation of the various happenings. 
Hence their accusations of the German army are nothing else but false defama- 
tions which are easily disproved by the documentary evidence appended. 

The Imperial German Government is of opinion that the evidence published 
In the appendix proves convincingly that the actions of the German troops 
against the civilian population were provoked by the franctireur war which 
was a violation of international law, and that they were justified by military 
necessity. On the other hand the Imperial German Government protests sol- 
emnly and emphatically against the dishonest fight which a civilian population 
waged against German soldiers with the most reprehensible means, and even 
more against the attitude of the Belgian Government which after the utter 
neglect of its duties, shown in its indulgence of the wild passions of the popu- 
lation, now is shameless enough to belie and defame the German army, in order 
to exonerate itself from its own heavy guilt. 
BERLIN, May 10, 1915. 

Appendix III, 5. 

Report of Colonel von Gottberg of the Infantry Regiment "Freiherr von Sparr" 
(3. Westphalian) No. 10 to the 14. Division.™ 

GUIGNICOURT, September 29, 1915. 

On August 5, 1914, at the beginning of darkness, a strong fire from many 
windows was opened on the baggage team by the inhabitants of the village 
of Blegny; Lieutenant Hahn testifies that soldiers were shot upon at night 
from the very houses in which they had been guests during the day. Muske- 
teer Gockeln of the 6th company was killed, and musketeer Hocbgraefe of the 
7th company was wounded in the shoulder. Both companies are witnesses. The 
occurrences were repeated during the night, when the musketeers Mniworm 
and Epping of the 5th company were wounded. 

Lieutenant Edler von Daniels testifies that his patrol squad was fired upon 
from ambush in a Belgian town near Blegny; it happened on a street in which 
the 9th company camped for a day and a night. 

Near Troisfontaines the 11th company was fired upon from houses by 
civilians. Musketeers Meister and Sehwaffertz were wounded. In the same 
locality some members of this company in day time were treated to cigars and 
eatables by an elderly man; the same man fired upon them at night and 
wounded one soldier of the company. 

Dr. Falk, a staff physician, who on August 5, 1914, was going with the first 
aid squad to look for wounded, was fired upon by civilians, and had to seek 
shelter. Sergeant Voss of the 4th company was killed with three shots 
by civilians. His body could not be removed, because the street was covered 
by the guns of the inhabitants. Lieutenant Hahn is an eye-witness. 

In Anderlues, on August 22, shots were fired from a house by a French 
soldier and a civilian. The acting sergeant and another non-commissioned 
officer were seriously wounded, and a musketeer of the 11th company was 
killed. Captain Eckhardt is witness of the occurrence. The soldier and the 
civilian were put to death. 

Signed: von Gottberg. 

Appendix III, 6. 

Report of the 64. Infantry Brigade to the 32. Division.™ 

Staff of the Brigade, Quartier Conde, October 8, 1914. 
On August 5 of the present year, the 64th infantry brigade reached Gouvy. 
The population at first pretended to be friendly to the Germans and was very 
obliging; thus e. g. it furnished pails with drinking water for the troops 



73 Die voelkerrechtllche Fuehrung. . . . S. 12. 

74 Cf. previous note, S. 25. 

63 



without being requisitioned. The chief of the railway station welcomed 
the soldiers; and the parish priest of the place tried to be agreeable to 
the officers. In spite of this the attitude of the people seemed suspicious to 
the brigade, and the town was searched for arms. The railway station was 
visited in the presence of the chief, who denied categorically that there were 
any goods, arms, explosives, etc. in the building. The statement, however, 
proved to be untrue. In a small room hidden away which, as the chief said, 
contained his personal furniture, several cases were found with about 300 
Browning pistols, and in addition, a hundred pounds of dynamite. As the chief 
was unable to furnish any satisfactory information as to the use of the wea- 
pons and explosives he was arrested. 

During the night from August 8 to 9 lieutenant Schmidt, ordnance officer 
of the 64th Infantry Brigade, was commissioned to go to Vielsalm in order to 
call to arms the battalion of Rifle-Guards and the 11th Riflemen. On his way 
thither he was fired upon by civilians in the vicinity of Bovigny; there were 
no enemy troops in that district at the time. 

The staff of the brigade testified that the civilian population of Leffe fired 
upon the troops of the 64th Infantry Brigade from cellar windows and barri- 
caded houses for some time after the place had been taken. In some instances 
they used small shot, which caused several losses, even among officers. 

Signed: Morgensteru-Doering. 

Appendix III, 7. 

Report of Infantry Regiment No. 23 "Von Winterfeldt" to the 24th Infantry 

Brigade. 1 ^ 

October 4, 1914. 

Captain Illgner reports: On August 22 in Leglise two civilians from Antler, 
who were met with firearms in their possession by two grenadiers, were deliv- 
ered over to the company, which was engaged in protecting the baggage. Dur- 
ing this time the company was repeatedly shot upon by civilians. 

In Tintigny a reservist of Infantry Regiment No. 38 was found who had 
been slain by the inhabitants with a brick-axe. In Laheycourt a man of the 
I. battalion shot and killed a civilian who shot from a garden upon the soldiers. 

Captain von Debscliitz reports: In our first quarters in Belgium in Noth- 
omb, after the Commanding-general's proclamation had been announced, a 
great number of military rifles with ammunition were handed in by civilians 
which undoubtedly had been distributed only shortly before by th« authorities 
for the purpose of franctireur warfare. So far as I know, they were Menier 
rifles, they had been freshly greased; the cartridges were packed in stamped 
linen-packages, exactly as if they had just been received from an army depot. 

Lieutenant of the Reserves, Schmidt, in charge of the baggage of the regi- 
ment, reports: During the night from August 23-24 the baggage of -egiment 
was repeatedly fired upon in Houdemont and Rulles while on the way from 
Habay to La Neuve-Ansart. In Houdemont the inhabitants shot from behind 
the windows and walls; thereupon several houses were burned. On leaving 
Houdemont the baggage had to pass through a cutting; small light signal* 
were noticed from all sides, and suddenly the baggage was fired upon from 
the front, from behind and from both sides. The projectiles pierced the planks 
of the wagon and the grain bags; we are still in possession of one of the duI- 
lets. One man is missing, two horses were wounded and had to be killed. The 
baggage was also fired upon in Rulles and behind Rulles from front and the 
right flank. 

On August 24 franctireurs again fired from the houses upon the baggage 
on the road Ansart-Tintigny; two soldiers of the transport service were killed. 
On the evening of August 25 the baggage passed through the village of VII I era 
devant Orval. The men were received in a friendly way by the inhabitants, 
who gave fruit and food to them. After dark when the baggage halted about 
1% Km. behind the village, they were suddenly fired upon from behind. 

Signed: Count Keller. 

Appendix III, 8. 

Coort-Martial Examination of Sergeant Ebers of the 3. Guard Regiment Field 

Artillery .™* 

Conducted in the garrison of the same regiment. 

Berlin, November 12, 1914. 
There appeared after summons George Ebers, sergeant of the Landwehr, 
clerk in the main office of the Great City Railway of Berlin, at present with 
the 4th Reserve Battery of the 3rd Regiment Field Artillery Guard, and after 
being duly sworn in declared: 

On August 23, 1914, I was with the 5th Battery of the 1. Regiment Field 
Artillery Guard in the capacity of non-commissioned officer, and was wounded 
in the vicinity of Namur. On the following day, August 24, I was translerred 



TB Cf. previous note, S. 31. 
75» lb., S. 52. 



54 



to the field hospital No. 2 of the 11th Army Corps, located in the convent Cham- 
pion near Namur. In the evening of this day about 10 o'clock, when all had 
retired, there was suddenly a general shooting piercing through the windows, 
which came from the opposite houses, as we noticed from the flashes of light. 
I have seen myself in about ten cases that civilians fired upon us from windows 
and openings in the roofs of their houses opposite the wing of the convent. 
When the firing began the soldiers of the sanitary service and those slightly 
wounded, to whom I belonged, gathered in the hallway around the physicians; 
we searched then for the Sisters whom we found hidden in the cellar; we took 
them with us and went to the main entrance in order to effect an escape; 
meanwhile a Belgian and a French physician, who both were in the hospital as 
prisoners, went to the gate and harangued the people. Thereupon the firing 
stopped. But when we entered upon the street in order to search the village 
with the help of a few men from a nearby munitions post, the firing began 
again, and lasted until about 11:00 o'clock. During the night about ten houses 
from which shots had been fired were set on fire. At daybreak we noticed 
that the outer wall of the convent showed numerous marks of shots; we found 
furthermore in a house just opposite the main entrance, in which a priest was 
living, about 40 cases of dynamite and about 30 cases of cartridges. I was 
present myself when an expert in fireworks ascertained the number and the 
contents of the cases. 

Read, approved, signed. 

Signed: George libers. 
Tried, as above. 

Signed: Guradze. 
Lieutenant of the Reserve Field Artillery II, and court officer. 

Appendix III, 9. 

Court-Martial Examination of Cavalry Captain von Gualta, of the Ulan 

Westphal, and of Sergeant Hammermeister, all of the 

Ulan Reserve Regiment No. 2. 76 

Court of 2nd Guard Reserve Division. Present: Military Counsellor of 
Justice, Dr. Bernhold; Military Court Secretary Guntowsky. 

Bazancourt, November 22, 1914. 

There appeared the following witnesses, who after being instructed on the 
significance and sanctity of the oath, were permitted to make the following 
statements: 

1. Cavalry Captain von Gualta of the Reserve Regiment of Ulans No. 2: 
As to personality: My name is Leon, I am 36 years old, and belong to the 

Evangelical denomination. 

As to matter: August 22, 1914, I and the lieutenant Feierabend of the 
Dragoons Regiment No. 1, rode together at the head of a squad of cavalry con- 
sisting of about 25 Ulans with the commission of exploring the bridge near 
Monceau sur Sambre. Right in the middle of the city of Monceau sur Sambre, 
while we were conversing in the Rue Neuve, a strong fusillade was directed 
upon us. The shooting came from all the windows of the houses and the 
apertures in the cellars. "When I noticed that the men around me were falling 
I rode into a side street. One Ulan was killed, four were wounded, six horses 
fell, and lieutenant Feierabend was shot through the leg. I got away 
unscathed, but the map which I held in my left hand was pierced by two shots; 
a sign that the fire directed upon me came from a shot gun. 

I am convinced that the fusillade was started on a signal agreed upon. 
Read, approved, signed. 

Signed: von Gualta. 

The witness was then sworn in. 

2. Sergeant Hammermeister of the Reserve Regiment of Ulans, No. 2. 

As to personality: My name is Herman, I am 23 years old, and belong to 
the Evangelical denomination. 

As to matter: On August 22 I was part of the patrol commanded by the 
first lieutenant von Guaita. We were commissioned to explore the bridge of 
the Sambre. When on a street in Monceau sur Sambre, fire was opened on us 
from the front, as far as my recollection goes, in two volleys. This evidently 
was the signal for the fire directed on us then from the buildings. The shoot- 
ing came from doors, windows and apertures in cellars. I saw in a door a 
civilian, who fired on us with a revolver. Persons of military rank were not 
to be seen. 

Read, approved, signed. 

Signed: Hammermeister. 

The witness was then sworn in. 

3. Ulan Westphal of the Reserve Regiment of Ulans, No. 21. 

As to personality: My name is William Westphal, I am 26 years old, and 
belong to the Evangelical church. 

As to matter: When the reserve regiment of Ulans No. 2 passed through 
Monceau sur Sambre, I was In front of It as a bicyclist. Right on the main 
street I was fired upon from a house at the moment when I turned to inform 

Tfl lb., S. 61. 

55 



the regiment that the patrol under the first lieutenant von Guaita received a 
severe fusillade. With some of the men of the reserve Infantry Regiment No.. 
15 I penetrated into the house from which the shots came, and saw there 
near the staircase a civilian with a gun in his hand. We killed the man 
instantly. 

Read, approved, signed. 

Signed: William Westphal. 
The witness was then sworn in. 

Done as above. 
Signed: Dr. Bernhold — Guntowsky. 

Note: Since the hearings of the military court were all conducted in the 
same manner, only the statements of fact are given in the following documents 
of this kind. 

Appendix III, 10. 

Judicial Hearing 1* of Musketeer Peter Beble of the Infantry Regiment No. 16, 

2, of the Non-Commissioned Officer Otto Biernirth of the Reserve Infantry 

Regiment No. 213, and 3. of the Volunteer Francis Breidbach 

of the Reserve Infantry Regiment No. 235.77 

1. "In the middle of August we were fired upon by the civil population of 
a Belgian village, I believe it was Tirlemont, at the coming of darkness; Bel- 
gian soldiers had long since disappeared from the district. In one place the 
fire came from an orchard. My comrade Francis Gockel was shot through the 
hind part of the head and mortally wounded. Orders were then given to search 
for the weapons in the houses, to arrest all male persons and to bring the 
women and children to the church. We found unfinished revolvers on which the 
woodwork was lacking. The houses from which shots were fired, were set 
on fire." 

2. "On October 20 we were before the town of Staden (Flanders). Through 
the entire night there was a battle exclusively with snipers shooting from the 
houses. We received orders to take the city in the morning. About 400 or 500 
meters before the city fire was opened on our flank from a single house, which 
hit our comrade Froese. When we took the house four franctireurs came out." 

3. "On October 19 we marched through Roulers, taken by the infantry 
regiment No. 233. Our company was at the head; the whole city was badly 
damaged, only one street was practically untouched. We were fired upon from 
the houses of this street, especially from the apertures in the cellars. Just 
ahead of me my comrade Kremst of Koblenz fell, two others were slightly 
wounded. In searching the houses we found from six to eight franctireurs 
and a number of revolvers. In the houses there must have been a large 
amount of ammunition, because after the houses were set on fire there were 
continuous explosions. 

"On October 22 I came to the field hospital in Roulers. There I heard four 
or five shots fired into the hospital; a ■wounded rifleman, who was on a stretcher 
in front of the hospital, was killed by franctireurs." 

Appendix III, 11. 

Report of the Lieutenant von Mansteln, Attached to the 1. Squadron of the 
Dragoon Regiment No. 4.78 

A patrol which escaped from two French squadrons in the direction of 
Beheme, was fired upon by the inhabitants of this place. We found instruc- 
tions of August 8, in which the chief of the "Gardes forestiers" informed the 
mayors that gendarmes and foresters were instructed to organize the inhabit- 
ants to resist with arms. A citizen of Chiny informed me on my request — he 
believed me to be either French or English — that on the previous day the 
"gardes civiles" came to the place and instructed the people in handling the 
arms and defending the village. The people, he added, were fully prepared to 
conduct a war of civilians. 

The inhabitants of Peissant on August 24 closed with heavy barricades 
all entrances to the town; they closed the doors and shutters of all the houses, 
and provided them with loop-holes; they refused to open a passage for me, 
because they knew I intended to escape a company of English infantry sta- 
tioned near the village, and I had only an orderly with me. During the night 
they indicated to the English artillery the farm premises occupied by the 1st 
squadron of the Ulan regiment No. 1 and the 1st squadron of the dragoon regi- 
ment No. 4, as well as the houses in which the munitions were stored away. 
In fact, the next evening the English artillery directed its fire on these farms 
and houses. 

Signed: von Manstein. 
Lieutenant in the Ulan Regiment No. 10, attached to the 1st squadron of the 

Dragoon Regiment No. 4. 



77 lb., S. 65-67. (Extract.) 

78 lb., S. 71. 



66 



Appendix III, 12. 

Court-Martial Examination of Reservists Gustav Voigt, Fritz Marks and Henry 
Hartmann, of Infantry Regiment No. 165J9 

1. "In the morning of August 6, I and seven other comrades became 
detached from our troop. We had to sneak through the gardens of a village 
closely beyond Herve in Belgium to look for cover. Suddenly we saw how five 
Belgian soldiers threw up their hands and wished to surrender. They hailed 
us and we approached them and noticed that they had two Germans with them 
(of the 10th Hussars) bound with ropes. One of the latter drew our attention 
to a third Hussar hanging up in a tree dead. The two Hussars also told us 
that the five Belgians had hanged and mutilated their comrade, and that the 
five Belgians had just been getting ready to kill or mutilate them, if we had 
not come up. We disarmed the Belgians, took them prisoners and delivered 
them to a troop of the 5th Ulans who had already several captured Belgians 
with them. We joined the Ulans to get back to our company, and, while pass- 
ing through the village, were fired at from cellars and windows. I do not 
know the name of the village, but it is situated between Herve and a big coal 
mine in the direction towards Liege. 

On the day previous to that incident our company was engaged in a skir- 
mish of outposts to the right of Herve; at that time a one-year-private of Com- 
pany 5 of Infantry Regiment No. 165 was wounded and left where he fell. 
When we passed the spot the next morning we found the body of that private 
at a garden fence; both his eyes had been gouged out. Everyone of us was 
convinced that villagers had done this. . . .80 

2. On August 5th our battalion marched through a village near Herve in 
Belgium. A man of the 5th company met us and exclaimed: "Such a dirty 
trick, now they have gouged out the eyes of one of our men." He pointed out 
where the man lay. We all had to pass the spot and there saw the dead man 
lie by the fence with both eyes gouged out. We were certain that villagers had 
done this. When on the next day we again passed through the village we were 
shot at from cellars and windows, and orders were given to disarm and arrest 
the villagers. We entered the houses and executed the order. But 
when the shooting continued all the same six guilty Belgian peasants were 
executed by order of an officer." 

3. "I, too, saw the private of Company 5 with his eyes gouged out. The 
officer in charge of our company, Captain Burkholz, ordered us to search the 
houses of the village. In the house by the fence of which the body of the pri- 
vate had been found, we discovered a big, strong middle-aged man who lay in 
bed and feigned sleep. We arrested him and led him before the officers who 
examined the man. He was then shot upon order by a musketeer of Company 4. 

"While we marched on Liege we passed a German infantryman who had 
been submerged, head down, in a bog and was dead." 

Appendix III, 13. 

Court-Martial Examination of Reservist Ernst Baldeweg of Infantry 
Regiment No. 35.81 

"On or about August 8, 1914, I personally observed in a stable near the vil- 
lage of Verviers that the tongue of a horse had been cut off and in another 
stable I saw that the tongues of four horses had been cut off. The tongue of 
the horse in the first stable was not quite severed, but hung out of its mouth 
by a little band at the palate. I presume that Belgian civilians mutilated the 
animals so that they could not be of service any more to the Germans. 

Either on Sunday, August 9, 1914, or on Monday. August 10, 1914, in a place 
which adjoins Herve, Belgium, I saw a German hussar tied by his hands and 
his feet to a tree. Two big nails had been driven through his eyes so that he 
was spiked to the tree by the two nails. The hussar was dead. In the same 
village, near a wooden fence in front of a farm, lay an infantrist of the 52nd 
Regiment whose eyes were gouged and whose ears, nose and fingers had been 
severed and abdomen cut open so that the intestines protruded. The dead man 
also showed stab wounds in his chest which had completely lacerated it. Both 
cases can only have been perpetrated by Belgian civilians. 

I wish to affirm that I have stated only my personal observations and that 
I have carefully avoided to exaggerate anything." 

Appendix III, 14. 

Court-Martial Examination of Captain Troeger of Infantry Reserve 
Regiment No. 204.82 

"During the march from Ghent to Thourout two volunteers of Reserve 
Infantry Regiment No. 203 who had fallen by the roadside through fatigue, were 
mutilated by Belgian village inhabitants. Their noses and ears -were cut off, 



79 lb., S. 74 u. 75. ' 

80 Finally, it is also reported that another German soldier was found dead, who had been 
mutilated in an indecent manner. — Author. 

81 lb., S. 78. 

82 lb., S. 87. 

57 



the abdomen ripped open and the head of one of them was crushed in with the 
heel of a boot. This fact was reported to us by Company-commander, Captain 
of Reserve County Councilor znr Nieden, of whose company the two volun- 
teers had been members. 

Another case which occurred in Eessen-Kapnel is as follows: 
Non-commissioned officer Schnitzer of the 5th company of Reserve Infan- 
try Regiment No. 204 reported to me on October 26 or 27 that he had found a 
mutilated Prussian Cavalry man lying near Eessen-Kappel, whose ears and 
nose had been cut off, and whose abdomen was slashed open by the inhabitants. 
The non-commissioned officer searched the surrounding farms with a detach- 
ment of soldiers, and shot some inhabitants who were found armed. 

During our march across Belgium from Ghent, we were continuously sub- 
jected to the firing of the village population out of houses and church steeples." 

Appendix III, 15. 

Court-Martial Examination of Sergeant-Major Weinreich of the Infantry 

Regiment No. 20. 83 

"One day in the middle of August I was driving with the conveyances of 
our company in the rear of our men engaged in battle. At the entrance of 
Neer-Linter I saw a German hussar lying near a house, covered with a sack. 
I dismounted, took up the sack, and noticed that the hussar was dead. His 
face was covered with blood, the eye sockets were empty, and the eyeballs 
were cut out. The coat was unbuttoned, the chest was bare and showed about 
twenty gaping wounds. The hands were tied together on his back. I covered 
the body again with the sack." 

Appendix III, 16. 

Revolt of the Belgian Population at Aerschot on August 19 and -<>. 1914.84 
SUMMARY REPORT. 

The officially appointed Belgian Investigation Commission and the foreign 
press have, among their numerous defamations of the German warfare in Bel- 
gium, discussed the Aerschot incident. Both dwelled at length on descrip- 
tions of the "barbaric" conduct of the German troops and their officers toward 
the "harmless" population and the lack of cause for the retaliatory treatment 
meted out to the "peaceful" city. The true facts of the case, which were 
ascertained through a number of sworn affidavits carefully drawn up with 
reliable witnesses present show an entirely different picture: 

On August 19, 1914, German troops of the eighth infantry brigade were 
quartered in Aerschot. The staff of the brigade entered the apparently peace- 
ful city on this day. Colonel Stenger, Commander of the brigade, despatched 
Captain Schwarz, his Adjutant, ahead to provide for quarters for the members 
of the staff. Captain Schwarz was cordially received by the mayor and his 
wife. The mayor placed his own home, situated on the market place, at the 
disposal of the officers, as the best quarters available. Colonel Stenger, and 
his orderly-officer Lieutenant Beyersdorff, arrived there between four and five 
o'clock in the afternoon. (Appendix 1.) 

From the beginning the relations between the officers and their host were 
quite polite and courteous. (Appendix 1.) 

Colonel Jenrlch, Commander of the Infantry Regiment No. 140 who had 
been appointed as post-commander, summoned the mayor before him and ques- 
tioned him whether any dispersed Belgian soldiers were in hiding in the city 
and whether Belgian soldiers in civilian clothes were hidden in the houses. 
The mayor answered these questions in the negative. Colonel Jenrich warned 
him expressly against attacks by the civilian population for which he, as mayor, 
would be responsible with his head, and requested him to look after the sur- 
render of arms by the inhabitants. This request had to be repeated twice by 
Colonel Jenrich, because it was found that large quantities of arms had been 
retained by the population. (Appendix 2.) 

Suddenly at eight o'clock in the evening an especially loud shot was heard 
in the city. This was the signal for the commencement of a general shooting 
upon the German soldiers in the streets and in the market place. (Appendix 
2, 4.) The firing — and evidently the signal shot, too — started from a window 
in the attic of a corner house near the market place, situated opposite to the 
house of the Mayor. (Appendix 3.) Three volleys were fired from this house. 
Then the firing subsided for a short while, after which it was followed by 
lively rapid fire from many houses. Most of the shots came from attic windows. 
All doors and windows in the house out of which the first shots had been 
fired were tightly closed and had to be forced open by the soldiers. The house 
was set on fire. A number of civilians who had attempted to escape were 
apprehended, many among them with weapons in hand. (Appendix 5.) Of 
these, 88 grown-up men were shot as franctireurs. (Appendix 3.) 



83 lb., s. 85. 

84 lb.. S. 91-92. 



58 



Colonel Stenger had remained alone in his room in the mayor's residence. 
A notice posted in front of the house clearly marked it as headquarters of the 
brigade staff. Relying- upon the simulated friendliness of the inhabitants 
Colonel Stenger had spent the afternoon on the balcony in front of his room, 
in plain view of everybody. Toward evening he had stayed near the open bal- 
cony doors In the well-lighted room. (Appendix 1.) 

When Captain Schwarss and Lieutenant Beyersdorff went to call on him 
after eight o'clock that evening to receive his instructions relative to the 
attack, they found Colonel Stenger lying mortally wounded in the middle of 
the lighted room breathing his last; the doors leading to the balcony were 
open. A physician was immediately summoned but could only establish that 
Colonel Stenger was already dead. (Appendix 1.) The shots, therefore, were 
fired upon the Colonel at the same time at which the first heavy firing com- 
menced from the houses situated across from his room. This was a well- 
planned attack upon the German troops, devised to deprive them of their com- 
mander and thus throw them into confusion. For this reason the firing ceased 
after the first volleys had been fired, and the criminals, seeing that the murder 
of the Colonel had been accomplished, started their attack against the, as they 
thought, leaderless German troops in force. The events are so clear that the 
preceding simulated friendliness of the inhabitants only serves to strengthen, 
and not to weaken, their connection, as the Belgian reports claim. 

That also the family of the mayor not only knew of, but even participated 
in the hostilities was established by an immediate search of their residence: 
Shots had been fired from the locked cellar, the key to which the family 
claimed to have mislaid and which had to be broken open. A step had even 
been placed near the cellar windows, to ease the position of the marksman. 
(Appendix 1.) One of the musketeers was positive to have observed a shot 
coming out of the house. (Appendix 3.) Only the son of the mayor could be 
the perpetrator. He had been hidden by the family and was dragged forth 
from a dark room. (Appendix 1.) As complicity in the murder of the, accord- 
ing to Belgian presentation "hospitably" received. Colonel fell upon the family, 
father and son were shot on the following day, August 20. (Appendix 2.) The 
Mayor's brother, in whose home Captain Karge, who had been quartered there 
at the suggestion of the Mayor, was also attacked, met with the same fate. 
(Appendix 2, 3.) 

The sequence of the shootings alone bar all doubts that it was a case of a 
well-planned treacherous attack upon the German force of occupation. This 
was also admitted to Captain Karge by an educated civilian who was taken 
prisoner. (Appendix 3.) 

The participation of the Mayor's whole family proves how systematically 
the Belgian authorities took part in the treacherous actions against German 
troops which unfortunately occurred so frequently. In Aerschot the official 
participation culminated in the foul murder of the military commander. 

Berlin, January 17, 1915. 
Military Bureau for the Investigation of Offenses against the Laws of War. 
Signed: Major Bauer. 

Signed: Dr. Wagner, district court councilor. 

Note: Space does not permit publishing the five extensive appendices re- 
ferred to in the report. — Author. 

Appendix III, 17. 

Extracts from the Report of Battle of the 1. Field Company of the Pioneer 

Battalion No. 12 In Regard to the Exploration of August 21, 1914, 

Executed Under Great Difficulties, in Co-Operation with the 

2. Battalion, Regiment No. 108, Sharp Shooters.85 

As soon as the first houses of Dinant were reached, the street lights were 
destroyed; the columns marched closely alongside of both rows of buildings 
and came to the first cross street. Here the infantrymen in the front were 
welcomed with strong firing from the house on the right corner, to which 
they replied immediately. Suddenly there came firing from all the houses, and 
a violent street battle ensued. The pioneers opened the closed doors with 
hatchets and axes, threw hand grenades in the lower parts, and set other 
houses on fire with the torches lighted in the mean time. 

Lieutenant Brink turned into the side street on the left, which was bar- 
ricaded with wire; stones were thrown from the houses, and shots were fired. 

All of a sudden the division was fired upon from the rear, and had to 
return to the corner of the street. Corporal Grosse, who was hit by several 
stones and lay unconscious on the wire obstruction, was taken along. 

The first detachment had 15 slightly wounded and one seriously. 

85 ib., s. 129. 

59 



Appendix III, 18. 

LA MALMAISON, December 5, 1914.86 

In matters of investigation of the offenses committed against German 
troops contrary to the law of nations, Miiller, private in the transport service 
of the reserves, 2nd field engineer-company, engineer battalion 12, appeared as 
witness. The solemnity of the oath was impressed on him, and he gave evi- 
dence as follows: 

My name is Erwin Miiller. I am twenty-six years of age, a Protestant 
and a fruit grower. 

On August 25, 1914, in the afternoon Sergeant Fehrmann and I noticed 
the corpses of a number of male civilians and one woman lying outside a 
house in a cross street at Dinant. We entered the house. In the room to the 
right lay an officer, lieutenant of Infantry Regiment No. 182, a cushion below 
his head. His head and part of his chest were covered with a white cloth. 
Two soldiers lay on one side of him, one soldier on the other. All three sol- 
diers wore the uniform of regiment No. 182. In the adjoining room a sergeant 
and five soldiers of the same regiment lay likewise dead. 

I raised the cloth from the dead lieutenant's body and noticed that he had 
a gun shot wound in his head. I noticed no further wounds on him. 

By the side of the lieutenant lay a soldier with his abdomen exposed. He 
had been shot in the abdomen. Blood was coming from a gash which extended 
at least 10 centimeters from the larynx, sideways to the left; the edges of the 
wound stood about one centimeter apart. The blood had trickled down to his 
side. In my opinion it could only be a wound caused by cutting. 

There was a soldier in the other room who also had his abdomen exposed. 
He had a wound about three centimeters wide in his abdomen. The wound was 
due either to a cut or to a stah. The clothes of the other soldiers were not dis- 
arranged, they had all gunshot wounds. 

I had the impression as if the officer, the sergeant and the men had been 
taken by surprise in their quarters during sleep. I think so because I found 
the officer with a sofa cushion, and the others with a blanket or their knap- 
sack under their heads. Their rifles stood in a corner. 

Reserve Engineer Kretzschmann was in the house together with Fehrmann 
and myself. 

Read, approved, signed. 

Signed: Emil Erwin Miiller. 

Appendix III, 19. 

PROUVAIS, February 24, 1915.87 

Summoned by Field Artillery Regiment No. 12 there appeared this day 
Colonel von Lippe of the Light Munition Column of the 2nd section of the 1st 
Field Artillery No. 12, to be examined under oath as witness to the events at 
Dinant. Colonel von Lippe declared: 

My name is Fritz von Lippe, my age forty, I am a Lutheran, by occupa- 
tion a farmer; enlisted on August 4, 1914, with the light munition column of 
the 2nd section of Field Artillery Regiment No. 12. 

On August 23, 1914, I saw behind the firing line of the 2nd section of the 
1st Artillery Regiment No. 12 the bodies of a rifleman and a sharpshooter. 
One of the bodies had the eyes gouged, the other lay half-charred under a heap 
of straw with its hands and feet tied. 

Colonel von Lippe then swore to the truth of his statement, after having 
been impressed with the meaning of the oath. 

Read, approved, signed. 

Signed: Fritz von Lippe. 

Appendix III, 20. 
Summary Report. 8t: 

I. The revolt of the city of Louvain against the German troops of 
occupation and the punitive measures taken against the city have stirred the 
whole world. 

The reason was, first of all, that Louvain is a city noted for its ancient 
university and its precious monuments and treasures of art, the fate of which 
was of far-reaching interest. The principal reason, however, was the fact 
that the enemies of the German people, especially the Belgian Government 
through the press and its foreign diplomatic representatives and through com- 
missioners, sent everywhere, disseminated news throughout the world adapted 
to prejudice public opinion against the Germans. 

The Commission appointed by the Belgian Government to investigate 
violations of international law and offenses against the laws and customs of 
war, attempted with all means to put the blame for the disturbances in Louvain 
on the German troops. In several reports the commissioners accuse the German 



so lb., S. 214. 

87 lb., S. 219. 

88 lb., S. 233-237. 



60 



troops of having, without any cause whatever and in violation of international 
law, attacked the, presumably, unsuspecting and peaceful citizens of Louvain, 
many of whom were ill-treated and wounded while a large number was killed; 
the city was said to have been pillaged, devastated, set afire, and even com- 
pletely destroyed. 

These accusations are false; it has been established, on the contrary, that 
the German troops were not guilty of objectionable conduct and did not 
commit acts which were contrary to international law. It is the civilian 
population of Louvain and vicinity who stand charged with having disregarded 
the provisions of international law, and with having caused through their 
thoughtless and criminal actions, damage to the German army as well as to 
the city of Louvain. 

II. According to the investigations which were instituted the happenings 
in Louvain were as follows: 

The first German troops marched into Louvain on August 19, 1914, and were 
billeted about the town. The relations between the population and the troops 
whose numbers and composition were subject to constant changes during 
the following days, were at first quite cordial. Not one excess occurred. The 
German troops conducted themselves, as even the Belgians admitted, in 
exemplary manner. But the population too, showed such friendly demeanor, 
that many of the German soldiers went about unarmed, because they felt quite 
safe in Louvain (Appendices 2, 3, 7-9, 11, 18, 31, 36, 38, 40, 45, 48). 

This peaceful picture suddenly changed on August 25, 1914. On this day 
Belgian troops sallied forth from Antwerp in the direction of Louvain. The 
German troops stationed in and about Louvain advanced to meet them; addi- 
tional troops were sent from Liege over Louvain to the front. Fighting 
occurred on the road to Malines at Bueken and Herent in the vicinity of 
Louvain. The engagement ended with a severe defeat of the Belgians who in 
the evening were forced back toward Antwerp. 

The inhabitants of Louvain who, even after the occupation of the city, had 
maintained secret communication with Antwerp and knew therefore of the 
impending sortie of their countrymen, had evidently not counted upon this 
result of the fighting. They had the mistaken idea that the Belgian army, 
supported by British auxiliary troops, ought to be successful in breaking 
through the German lines, and they regarded the temporary advance of the 
Belgian troops as a sufficient success and encouragement to warrant their 
own participation in the fighting (Appendices 1, 3, 45, 48). 

Before the battle was decided, toward 7 o'clock in the evening, a German 
"Landsturm" company marched back from the Northwest exit of Louvain to the 
East side of the city, to take up its position in the square in front of the 
railway station. The city appeared still quiet when they marched through. 
A few ammunition and transport columns and several small detachments of 
German troops were in the streets. There were no especially large bodies of 
German troops in Louvain at this time (Appendices 3, 7, 8, 38). 

Among the people of the city who watched the "Landsturm" company 
march through the streets were an unusually large number of young men, 
evidently of the better classes. They stood in small groups about the streets 
and gradually withdrew into the houses (Appendices 7, 10, 34, 46). Women and 
children were not visible. 

The return of the "Landsturm" company and of other small military 
detachments evidently led the citizens of Louvain to believe that the Germans 
had been defeated and were retreating, and that gave the external impetus to 
the execution of a plan, evidently laid long beforehand, to annihilate the Ger- 
mans during their retreat through the city. Shortly after the "Landsturm" 
company had arrived and made camp on the station square, toward 8 o'clock 
in the evening (German time), sky rockets were sent up in the city. Many 
of the soldiers observed first a green and then a red rocket appearing in the 
dark evening sky (Appendices 7, 8, 12-17, 22, 38, 45, 46). 

Simultaneously with this signal the inhabitants of Louvain opened a 
violent fire in various parts of the city upon the German troops on City Hall 
Square, Station Square and in the intervening section of the city. Rifles, 
revolvers and pistols were used, and the shooting was done from cellars, 
windows and chiefly from attics (Appendices 1-8, 7-13, 18-22, 24, 25, 29, 30, 32, 
33, 36, 37, 45-49). In some places the firing sounded as if machine guns were 
also being used (Appendices 2, 29, 38, 40, 42, 46, 49). The German soldiers were 
completely taken by surprise. Many of them were wounded and some killed, 
before they could rally to defend themselves. Much confusion was caused 
among the transport and other columns which were lined up in the streets, 
because the horses which were either scared through the firing, or hit by 
bullets or small-shot, tore themselves loose and raced through the streets 
(Appendices 8, 18, 19, 37, 47). 

A particularly heavy fire was directed upon the market place, where the 
first Echelon of the "General-Kommando" was stationed. Several officers and 
men were wounded and killed. The staff of the "General-Kommando" alone 
lost five officers, two clerks, twenty-three men and ninety-five horses 
(Appendix 1). 

The heaviest firing raged in "Station Street" and near the station. The 
"Landsturm" company, posted there between baggage wagons, was forced to 

61 



retreat into the station for better cover. Heavy firing was also directed 
against the troops who had taken position on the "Place du peuple" (Appendices 
6, 20, 46). 

The horror of this attack was increased by the darkness which enveloped 
the city because the street lighting system had been destroyed. The attacked 
troops attempted to concentrate, assumed the defensive and returned the fire. 
When the firing ceased momentarily the troops, acting upon orders from their 
superiors, forced their way into the houses from which shots had been fired, 
and commenced a search for the culprits. Some of these were killed during 
the fray (Appendices 1, 3, 29, 37), others were captured with arms in hand, 
and shot, according to the customs of war, after they had first been convicted 
of illegitimate participation in the fight (Appendices 19, 20, 37, 38, 40, 41, 43, 
44, 48). Many effected their escape through rear exits of the houses, and took 
part at other places in the street fighting which would break out again and 
again. 

While the fighting was in full swing, General von Boehn, the commander 
of the XI Reserve army corps returned to the city from the field. This was 
around 10:30 P. M. On his way to the City Hall, several shots were fired at 
him. To put an end to the street fighting General von Boehn ordered a "Land- 
wehr" brigade to advance into the city and had the Mayor and other citizens 
of standing seized as hostages. By his orders the hostages were led through 
the streets, and compelled to call on the citizens to cease hostilities. Although 
severe punishment was threatened, this request was not heeded. The popu- 
lation continued making attacks upon the troops. In their anger the people 
even shot at physicians, at members of the sanitary corps, and at sick and 
wounded who were under the protection of the Red Cross (Appendices 9, 21, 
25-28, 47). They had so little regard for the provisions of the Geneva Con- 
vention that they fired also from houses which flew the Red Cross flag 
(Appendices 29, 38), and they even directed their fire on a hospital (Appendices 
25, 27, 28). In several cases the use of explosives and bombs has been testified 
to (Appendices 36, 37, 46), and it has also been proven that boiling tar was 
poured on the German troops (Appendices 25, 29). 

In some instances the population resorted even to the abominable cruelties 
against German soldiers who had become defenseless. Private Hoos dis- 
covered in the cellar of a house the body of a German soldier whose abdomen 
had been ripped open with a sharp knife, so that the vitals protruded (Appendix 
35). Another German soldier was so horribly mutilated by the fiendish popu- 
lace that he died as a consequence (Appendix 37). 

In view of these brutal attacks the German troops were compelled to 
resort to energetic countermeasures. Carrying out their warnings inhabitants 
who had participated in the attacks were shot and the houses from which shots 
had been fired were burnt down. The spreading of the fire to the other houses 
could not be checked and thus several rows of houses burned down. In this 
manner the Cathedral, too, caught Are (Appendix 4). A further spread of the 
conflagration was stopped by our troops who, under direction of their officers, 
heroically worked to extinguish the flames (Appendices 4, 6). It is due to their 
efforts that only a comparatively small section of the city — the section situated 
between the station and City Hall Square — suffered from the fire. The 
magnificent City Hall was saved thanks to our soldiers. The fire from the 
burning houses illuminated the night and made it possible for our troops to 
meet the attacks more effectively. Thus, gradually the firing subsided; only 
a shot here and there was heard during the rest of the night. But the next 
morning the attack was vigorously renewed, and the disorders continued all 
day and lasted through the following day, although the hostages were again 
led through the streets on August 26th and 27th, to counsel the people to 
keep quiet (Appendices 1, 37, 38, 40, 44, 45, 47). 

III. Besides the sky-rocket signals, which had been observed at the 
beginning of the attack, the following facts let it appear that the revolt did 
not start on the spur of the moment, but was the result of long and careful 
planning. 

(1) Arms in considerable quantities were found, although the Mayor 
declared that they had been surrendered as early as August 19th (Appendices 
1, 20). 

(2) It was observed that a large number of young men came to Louvain 
and scattered over the city (Appendices 3, 4). It was easy for them to find 
quarters in the hotels and in the bachelor rooms left vacant by the students. 

(3) Numerous supplies of cartridges and explosives, which had been 
hidden by the population, exploded in the burning houses (Appendices 1, 2, 
6, 37). 

The attack, which was conducted with great stubborness for several days, 
must therefore have been premeditated. The long duration of the sedition 
against the German military authority precludes the idea that it was a plan- 
less action of a few excited individuals. The leadership of the treacherous 
revolt must have been in the hands of higher quarters. Everything points 
toward the participation of an official organization. Louvain was the head- 
quarters of the Chief of the so-called "Garde-Civique." He had been in the 
citv immediately before the outbreak of the rising and the revolt was started 
with the despatch to Louvain of untrained young men who wore no distinctive 
emblems and who, together with the soldiers who had been transformed into 

62 



civilians, hid themselves in the houses, for the purpose of firing, unseen, upon 
the apparently retreating German troops at the proper moment. Even the 
Belgian Government has never dared to assert that regular troops of the 
Belgian army co-operated in the venture. Thus we have here the treacherous 
action of franctireurs who were readily given shelter and places of conceal- 
ment by the population of Louvain. The misdeeds of the "Garde-Civique" 
stand revealed to the whole civilized world by the typical case of Louvain 
(Appendices 1, 30, 45, 48). Unfortunately also a number of clerics permitted 
themselves to abuse their influence over the civilian population and to induce 
them to shelter the franctireurs; it has been ascertained that a number of 
clerics even actively participated in the revolt (Appendices 1, 19. 34, 37, 38, 
41, 42, 45, 48). He who considers that the authentic verifications of the German 
Government in the case of Louvain are not based on the hurried examination 
of greatly excited, mostly ignorant persons, by equally excited inquisitors, but 
have their foundation upon thorough and calm investigations, may draw his 
own conclusions as to the merit of other similar accusations raised against the 
German troops by the Belgians. 

In the case of Louvain the official Belgian Investigation Commission 
attempted to explain the inconvenient but irrefutable fact of the shooting in 
the streets by claiming that it had been caused by German troops firing upon 
one another. The commission suppressed the fact, however, that the shooting 
lasted for days and was constantly renewed. With this simple statement the 
threadbare attempt to explain the start of the street riots collapses. 

While the Belgian Investigation Commission passes in short order over 
the main question under consideration, that of the violations of international 
law, it attempts by individual charges to cast aspersions upon the German 
army. It has not been possible on the German side to trace any of these 
cases, it must not be overlooked by those who want to judge impartially, 
upcn what testimony the accusations are based, which in comparison with 
the main question as to the cause of the street revolts, are of secondary 
importance. They were made by the same persons on whose testimony the 
assertions, scattered broadcast over the world by the Commission, were "based 
that Louvain was totally destroyed and that, as we read in the third report 
of the Commission, only the City Hall and the station building remained 
intact! The actual extent of the conflagration is shown in the accompanying 
sketch (50) — not even the sixth part of the city, and chiefly only that section 
situated near the station, was consumed by fire (Appendix 50). The truth of 
one of these calumnies can be actually proved because of its foolish attempt 
to cast aspersions upon the whole German military administration. According 
to the fifth report of the Commission "a large portion of the booty (alleged 
to be the result of pillaging) was transported on military wagons and later 
sent to Germany." This assertion is a pure invention; the army administration 
determines what shall be transported on military wagons or railroad cars, 
and it never issued such an order. 

How little value the Commission itself attributes to the stories which 
were brought before it, and which it unfortunately circulated without verifica- 
tion, is demonstrated in the fifth report which mentions the excution of Bishop 
Coenraets and Father Schmidt. After dwelling on, what the Commission itself 
calls the "alleged" execution, the report unhesitatingly adds the story that the 
involuntary spectators of this (alleged!) scene were compelled to show their 
approval by handclapping. A stronger admission cannot be made that the 
hurriedly gathered material is published for sensational reasons, no matter 
whether truth and justice are ignored. In this connection it is of interest to 
know — what can hardly have remained concealed from the Belgian Commission 
— that Mr. Coenraets is living safe and sound to this day in the home of 
Professor Dr. Toels in Jirlen, Holland. 

Berlin, April 19, 1915. 

Military Bureau for the Investigation of Offenses against 
the Laws of War, 

Signed: Major Bauer, 
Signed: Dr. Wagner, District Court Councilor. 

Note: Space does not permit publishing the appendices referred to in the 
above report. — Author. 

Appendix III, 21. 

From a Letter of Mr. Sittart, Member of Parliament, to the Author, June 8, 1915. 

.... The fact that in days of excitement, especially at this time of our 
world war, testimonies of witnesses must be considered very critically, has 
been brought home to me rather vividly on repeated occasions. On August 30, 
1914, I journeyed in an auto to Louvain in company with the Apostolic Prefect, 
Father Adalbert Rielaender, who was appointed rector of the German mis- 
sion in Kaiser-Wilhelm-Land in New Guinea, but was prevented to go to 
his post owing to the outbreak of the war. We greeted in the College Leon 
XIII. two Reverend Professors of the Louvain University, personally known to 
Father Rielaender, and we conversed with them on the sad events that had 
occurred on August 25. The gentlemen told us among other things that the 

63 



dean of St. Pierre had been shot with others by the Germans. A machine gun — 
it was said — placed on the tower of St. Pierre, fired on the German troops. 
Evidently the Germans were ignorant of the fact that church towers are 
almost exclusively property of the communes, and that, therefore, the parish 
priest cannot be held responsible, if shots were fired from the tower. The 
Belgian troops made use of the tower, and placed on it the machine gun. At 
their retreat before the advancing Germans they abandoned the gun; and the 
Germans who found it held the parish priest responsible and shot him. The 
death of the venerable priest, they continued, affected greatly the whole city, 
because he was well liked and esteemed, owing to his mild and kind disposition, 
not only among the faithful Catholics but also among the Liberals and 
Socialists. The death of this parish priest, attested by such well-known and 
eminent professors of the University, left no doubt on my mind, and I told 
the sad incident to my friends in Aix-la-Chapelle. A few days later, my friend, 
the well-known Dr. Carl Sonnenschein of M.-Gladbach, called on me on his 
return trip from Louvain, and I heard from him that the good priest was still 
alive, and hale and hearty. Nothing was done to him. 

A few days before the above date, about August 27, on the desire of 
Father Rielaender, I called on the Vice-Rector of the Louvain University, 
Monsignor Conraets, who was in tho sanitarium of the Luetticher Strasse (in 
Aix-la-Chapelle), the charge of which has been taken by the Franciscan Sisters 
of the Holy Family from the motherhouse in Louvain. It was with those 
Sisters that Monsignor Conraets came to Aix-la-Chapelle. He told me that 
he was marked by the Germans as hostage, that he was convinced, and 
expressed his conviction to the German officers, that the citizens of Louvain 
would remain quiet and would do no harm to the German soldiers. He was 
then summoned to go through the streets of Louvain in company with an 
officer and German soldiers and read a proclamation to the effect that attacks 
on German troops would be severely punished. Scarcely did he begin to read 
the text, when shots were fired upon the German soldiers, and the soldiers 
were on the point of seizing him as hostage, when the officer interfered, saying: 
Let him, the gentleman is not responsible. The officer then took him to a 
house, probably a convent, and told him to remain there meanwhile. After I 
had obtained the necessary pass for the Vice-Rector I took him, on said August 
30, to the convent of the Franciscan nuns, Gensterbloom, located near Henri 
Chapelle, and continued then my journey to Louvain. The above named Dr. 
Sonnenschein told me after his return from Louvain the following interesting 
episode. He met on the streets of Louvain a gentleman known to him from a 
previous sojourn in that city, who complained bitterly about the conduct of the 
Germans. He claimed to have known a number of prominent persons shot by 
the Germans, among them the Vice-Rector, Monsignor Conraets. Dr. Sonnen- 
schein, who on his way to Louvain paid a visit to Monsignor Conraets at my 
suggestion asked in astonishment, where he got the information. And there 
came the most astonishing answer: he had seen the shooting with his own 
eyes. Upon the further question of Dr. Sonnenschein, where it happened, the 
man took him in front of a house and said: There he stood, when he was shot. 
It was only then that Dr. Sonnenschein told him of his visit to Monsignor Con- 
raets on the morning of that same day, how he was hale and hearty, and how 
he wrote a letter to his friends in Louvain and told them that all was well with 
him. 

During my visit to Louvain I had occasion to verify, how grossly exagger- 
ated were the accounts of the destructions in the city which was said to have 
been completely devastated. In the same manner I found that the reports about 
destructions in Vise and Herve were greatly exaggerated. From Fort Berru 
near Reims I saw with the naked eye as well as with the assistance of field 
glasses the towers of the cathedral standing erect. They were said to have 
disappeared, and yet only on one of them were there any marks of the 
bombardment. 

Appendix III, 22.89 

Report of Ordnance Officer Count Reichenbach to the Assistant Military 
Inspector of the Volunteer Hospital Service in Berlin. 

VALENCIENNES, September 24, 1914. 

Yesterday 13 men of the volunteer hospital service, while engaged in the 
transport of wounded, were attacked by the civil population, although their 
red cross marks were very distinct. The event occurred in the vicinity of the 
main provision depot in this district, which is usually rather safe. Six of the 
men are dead, one is wounded. Acts of the hearings will follow later, possibly 
also the employment books of those that fell. 

Signed: Count Reichenbach. 



89 Appendices III, 22 — III, 26, are taken from the official publication: "Verletzung der 
Genfer Konvention vom 6. Juli 1906 durch franzoesische Truppen und Freischaerler. 

64 



Appendix III, 23. 

Report of the Commander of the 2. Sanitary Company to the 10. Infantry 

Division. 

ST. MAURICE, September 24, 1914. 

When on September 22 the first aid squad of the 2. Sanitary company was 
engaged in searching the battlefield for wounded soldiers, hostile infantry, 
about 40 or 50 men, appeared suddenly from the east end of the forest of St. 
Remy, under the direction of two officers. Although they saw or at least must 
have seen that before them were only hospital men, who were carrying 
wounded on stretchers or were searching for wounded with stretchers, and 
although they must have seen the ambulances in the neighborhood, they opened 
a violent fire on the hospital men and the ambulances at a distance of about 
50 meters; some of them with" the shouts of "Vive la France" ran upon the 
nearest ambulance, shot the three wounded that were inside, the officer of the 
convoy, the coachman and the two horses. 

The 2. Sanitary company owes to this procedure of the French the loss of 
8 killed, 9 seriously wounded and 2 slightly wounded. 

Most of the other hospital men were grazed in some spot or other by the 
bullets of the enemy. 

Signed: Uecker, 
Cavalry Captain and Commander. 

Appendix III, 24. 

Court-Martial Examination of the Cavalryman Francis Mevlssen of the Cavalry 

Regiment No. 7. 

"After the battle with the three French squadrons, which occurred on the 
7th of this month, about 10 kilometers southwest of Arlons on Belgian terri- 
tory, I hid myself in a haystack. From my hiding-place I saw how the French 
stabbed with their lances several German riflemen who were wounded but 
still living. I saw them walking around the battlefield during the night, and 
stabbing here and there the poor soldiers who by their movements gave sign 
of life. At one time one of them tried to rise over his horse, he was stabbed 
immediately." 

Appendix III, 25. 

Court-Martial Examination 1. of the Musketeer Kampen of the Infantry 

Regiment No. 78, and 2. of the Physician Schlichthorst, In 

Charge of the Reserve Hospital in Aurich. 

1. "On August 29 I was wounded in the right knee during the battle of 
St. Quentin and was left in the vicinity of the village Guise. When our troops 
retreated a certain distance, about 50 French soldiers under the direction of 
several officers came upon the scene at about 9:30 o'clock. They went zig- 
zagging over the battlefield, and I saw how they stabbed with their bayonets 
several wounded soldiers, among others one only about 10 steps away from me. 
As he called for help, a French officer shot with a pistol into his mouth, and he 
was killed Instantly. I am absolutely certain, that the perpetrator was an 
officer. 

Then they came upon me. I feigned to be dead; and they stabbed me 
several times, but the wounds, of which I received nine, were not very deep. 
They turned me with the points of their bayonets on the other side. One thrust 
of the bayonet went straight through my helmet and struck the last two 
fingers of my left hand, which I must have had on the left side of my head. 

The enemies then administered the same treatment to a few more wounded, 
and then retired, as Prussian troops were approaching." 

2. "When the wounded was handed in for treatment I saw — besides the 
main wound at the right knee — several minor wounds in other parts of the 
body, which were partly healed or in process of healing. According to the 
statement of the wounded these scars were caused by thrusts of bayonets 
administered to him by French soldiers, when he was left behind on the battle- 
field. Judging from the manner and appearance of these scars I entertain no 
doubt on the correctness and reliability of the statement of the witness." 

Appendix III, 26. 

Report of the Physicians Neumann and Gruenfelder of the Bavarian Pioneer 

Regiment to the Commandery of the General Depot, of the 7. Army, 

Concerning the Robbery and Mutilating of German 

Soldiers Near Orchies. 

VALENCIENNES, September 26, 1914. 
The 1. battalion of the Bavarian pioneer regiment received the commission 
to proceed against the town of Orchies, distant about 24 kilometers from 
Valencienaefl. When about 500 meters from Orchies the men in the front 

65 



ranks noticed in the ditch along the road the body of a German soldier of 
the Landwehr regiment No. 35. We found at once all the marks generally 
found with our dead soldiers, i. e. the body was stripped of shoes, stockings and 
of all signs of identification. The man was shot from behind, was lying on his 
back, and had his mouth and nostrils filled with sawdust. The right arm was 
stretched out in self-defense, and the rigidity caused by death was still present. 

After further search of the great field we found 20 more soldiers of the same 
regiment. One man who was found about 300 meters from the windmill of the 
place, was hit at the right ear and then maltreated in barbarous fashion. The 
left ear was cut off. The face showed a bluish red color, a consequence of his 
death by choking; the mouth, the nose, and eyes were filled with sawdust, and 
the neck showed marks of attempts at choking. The grass all around him for 
about 20 meters was trodden down, from which it appears that the barbarous 
act was committed by a number of men. In addition to these men we found 
an acting sergeant whose skull was fractured, so that the brains flowed out. 
Another showed on the left temple a knife wound, which cannot have been 
fatal; the ring finger was cut off; and in the abdomen there were four shot 
wounds around which there were marks of powder smoke, a sign that the 
shots were fired at close range; to these wounds corresponded the four open- 
ings in the back. Five other men were killed, who showed injuries that were 
caused by blunt weapons. One of them had a shot wound near the right nostril 
which tore away the upper lip and the chin. The face was blackened by the 
smoke of powder, and the rims of the wound were burned, all a sign of the 
close range of the firing. The most barbarous act of all was done to one man 
whose eyes were cut out, the right one completely and the left one still hang- 
ing on his face. Death in this case can have been caused only by this injury. 

From the ascertained facts it is evident that a great many of these men 
were not wounded when they fell into the hands of the enemy. To prevent 
their flight their suspenders were cut, all buttons were torn off their clothes, 
and they were stripped of their shoes. The rings of all the men were gone, 
but the marks where they had been were plainly visible on their Angers. 

The 1. battalion of the Bavarian pioneer regiment buried the 21 men in 
their graves near the road, about 500 meters southeast of Orchies. Their names 
were ascertained only in part. 

Signed: Dr. Neumann. 

Staff physician of the Bavarian pioneer 

regiment, 1st battalion, 1st reserve company. 

Signed: Dr. Graenfelder, 
Staff physician of reserves of the Bavarian pioneer 
regiment, 1st battalion, 2nd company. 

Appendix III, 27. 

A Sample of Textual Interpretation from Bedier. 

On page 17 of the work of Bedier is found a facsimile from the diary of an 
unnamed German soldier. The extract contains the following: "'25 Caffres 
seize. (?) At 1:15 marching to occupy the bridge. 10:00 o'clock departure for 
Orchies, arrived at 4:00 P. M., searching of houses. All civilians were 
arrested. One woman was shot, because she would not stop at the com- 
mand 'halt,' but tried to escape. Thereupon burning of the entire place. At 
7.1 departure from the burning — " 

The extract given in the facsimile is certainly too abrupt to enable us to 
understand the meaning of the beginning. The continuation, however, is in 
itself intelligible. The question is of the village of Orchies (Nord). where a 
punishment had to be administered (Cf. the previous Appendix). The writer 
of the diary took part in it. At first all the inhabitants were arrested and 
guarded. One woman tries to escape; the guard calls "halt;" a word under- 
stood by the French. She pays no attention to it and is shot. Then the town 
Is set on fire. The telegram from headquarters announced: "Orchies was razed 
to the ground." The extract of the diary gives a description of that event. 

What does Mr. B4dier now make of it? 

He reports as follows: "In order to prove that these assassinations of 
women and children are a daily necessity for the soldiers of Germany, I can 
produce some other texts: 

1. The author of an unsigned diary (fig. 7) relates that at Orchies (Nord) 
a woman was shot to death for refusing to obey the command: "halt." Where- 
upon, he adds, followed the burning of the whole locality. (Et, pour t6moigner 
que ces assassinats de femmes et d'enfants sont pour les soldats de 1'Allemagne 
besognes coutumieres, voici quelques autres textes: L'auteur d'un carnet non 
slgne (fig. 7) rapporte qu'a Orchies (Nord) "une femme fut passSe par les armes 
pour n'avoir pas ob6i au commandement de Halte. Sur quoi, ajoute-t-il, incen- 
die de toute la localite." In a foot-note he gives the following German text: 
"Saemtliche Civilpersonen werden verhaftet. Eine Frau wurde verschossen, 
weil sie auf "Halt* Rufen nlcht hielt, sondern ausreissen wollte. Hierauf Ver- 
brennen der ganzen Ortschaft." (Bedier, p. 17-18.) 

Be it remarked: 1. Bedier makes of a secondary incident the main thing: 
the shooting of the woman. 



2. He Intimates in his translation that the woman was shot in accordance 
with judicial procedure (fut passee par les armes), although there had been no 
trial and no sentence. The translation, to say the least, is ambiguous and liable 
to be misunderstood. 

3. He makes his French readers understand the incident in this way, that 
the woman did not obey the summons: "halt," and for that reason proceedings 
were instituted against her which ended with the execution. In his translation 
he omits the words: "but she meant to escape" ("sondern ausreissen wollte"), 
which give the true sense to the whole narrative. 

4. He connects the burning of the town with the refusal of the woman to 
stop (by translating the German "hierauf" with "sur quoi"); as if the disobedi- 
ence of the woman had been the cause of the fire. 

6. He makes use of this one incident to prove that the shooting of women 
was an "habitual practice" with the German soldiers. 

When he speaks of "verschossen," instead of "erschossen," he betrays his 
limited knowledge of the German language; though that may be of secondary 
consideration. 

Appendix III, 28. 

Letter of a Belgian Soldier to a Relative, August 21, 1914.»o 

"My dear Joseph: At last we have a day of rest, the first since the out- 
break of hostilities. We no longer receive any news from anywhere. The let- 
ter I received from you was dated August 14th. Not one of those whom I told 
this would believe it. I tell you that it gave me very much pleasure. In my 
last letter I told you of the battle of Haelen. Then we had to flee as quickly 
as possible in the rain of bullets. We remained in Haelen until the very last; 
and we set the tower of the church afire when they were only a hundred meters 
away. This was lucky for us, for the enemy would have had a good view from 
the church tower of the fields into which we retired. From there we retreated 
to Aerschot to serve as reinforcements. On the following day a fight of con- 
siderable magnitude took place there, and our troops retreated — not from 
necessity, but in consequence of a strategem in order to fool the 'bodies,' and 
so far we have fooled them. We have great hope and lots of courage. Today 
I saw Jacques Indheu; he has volunteered to carry wounded, as he told me he 
regrets not to have been present at a battle. I answered him that I wished 
there would be no battles, and that the war would soon end. 

"We have here retired behind the fortified positions of Antwerp, and for the 
moment have nothing to fear. In addition everybody says Antwerp is impreg- 
nable, especially as Liege is again in the hands of the French. 

"I am being called, dear Joseph. More soon. Regards at home." 

Appendix III, 29. 

Note Concerning tbe Alleged Outrages Against Belgian Nuns, by German 

Soldiers. 

Since the beginning of the present war one of the objects of a hostile press 
In enemy and neutral countries has been to besmirch the honor of the German 
army by the unheard of accusation that German soldiers in their march through 
Belgium have made themselves guilty of outrages against cloistered women, 
in numerous cases and in various localities. 

The German government has deemed it its duty to secure unimpeachable 
material, so that the foundation of such absurd accusations, which are entirely 
in contradiction with the German character, may totally collapse. The German 
governor general of Belgium therefore has addressed to all the Bishops of Bel- 
gium the request to make to him an official declaration as to whether facts 
from their dioceses were known to them which might give a coloring to the 
aforesaid accusations. 

The answers establish the complete nullity of the assertions. The Bishop 
of Liege said, that in his diocese no case had occurred of outrages against 
cloistered women; the Bishops of Namur, Ghent and Bruges signified that no 
such case had come to their knowledge; the Archbishop of Malines and the 
Vicar Capitular of Tournay declared that they were unable to produce any facts 
on that subject. 

BERLIN, June 13, 1915. The Foreign Office. 

Appendix III, 30. 

The Events In Louvuln. Merchant Richard Gruner, Hamburg, Testified Under 

Oatb:9l 

"... Amongst the persons brought forward were several clergy- 
men; altogether ten or fifteen of them have been shot. I myself established 
that one priest carried a loaded revolver from which a cartridge had been 
fired. The empty shell was still in the chamber of the revolver. In the case 
of another priest I am perfectly sure that he was the very man who had inten- 



se Cf. Grasshoff, p. 82. 

81 Die voelkerrechtliehe Fnchrang. . . . S. 303-305. 

67 



tlonally lured our soldiers, according to their own evidence, into the franc- 
tireur fire. There is no doubt that those two men were genuine clergymen. 
But a third man wore civilian dress under his clerical garb and I found a mili- 
tary mark (Erkennungsmarke) on him. 

All the time the examination was going on I stayed at the railway square. 
So I can confirm from my own knowledge that there was no mock-execution 
of clergymen and that none of the involuntary observers of those scenes were 
compelled to express any approval. 

Amongst those who were brought up were many civilians who, when they 
noticed that I spoke French, called out to me that they were innocent, and that 
the priests alone were responsible for what had occurred. They expressly 
pointed to those priests who had been rounded up with them. 

I remained at Louvain until August 26th, 1914, 4 P. M. During that day, I 
constantly saw and heard, every now and again, the firing which proceeded 
from the houses; comrades of mine were wounded in my immediate neighbor- 
hood, as e. g. volunteer Wuppermann. During the forenoon of August 26th I 
conversed with two of the many women who were held prisoners at the station 
square. They belonged evidently to the better classes. One of them — an Amer- 
ican woman from St. Louis — addressed me in English and begged me to lib- 
erate her and a woman friend, declaring that they were innocent. She declared 
that the clergymen had caused the whole trouble. She then fetched the other 
woman — a Belgian lady — with whom I talked in French. She, too, told me that 
the firing out of the houses was due to the attitude of the clergymen, and nar- 
rated the following story: In the evening Belgian soldiers in civilian clothes 
had entered the houses and forced the inhabitants under threats to take them 
in, and to allow them to shoot out of the windows; previous to this, the clergy- 
men had made the rounds of the houses and told the Inhabitants that it was 
their duty to take the Belgian soldiers into their homes and to assist them, 
because the German troops were waging war against the faith of the Bel- 
gians. ..." 

Appendix III, 31. 

From the Deposition Upon Oath of the Bank Official Hans Albert Hermann 

Koch of I. uol>eek, Concerning the Events In l.ouvalii,'- 

" . . .In my presence only two ecclesiastics were shot. According 
to statements made by soldiers about 350 or 400 unused English guns with 
ammunition were found with the one; with the other a Browning revolver 
with six bullets unused and two shells used. This second one abused in the 
filthiest manner both Germany and its emperor." 

Appendix III, 32. 
From the Deposition Upon Oath of the Turner Otto Paweldyk, Concerning the 

Events In Andenne. 83 

"... I received orders to guard the Belgian men and women gath- 
ered from the houses and put together in the market place of Andenne. At 
this occasion German women, married to Belgians, or also Belgian women, as 
far as they could speak German, told us guards that the parish priests of 
Andenne had announced from their pulpits that it was a patriotic duty of the 
civilian population to fire upon the German soldiers. The same ecclesiastics 
had spoken of a certain ringing of the bells, at the sound of which all the civ- 
ilians were to shoot upon the soldiers that were passing through. And thus 
the ringing of the bells was to be the beginning of the general war of snipers 
against our soldiers. 

Some of the women told us also that the mayor of Andenne tried to restrain 
the civilian population from doing violence to the German soldiers; but his 
advice was not followed. He was powerless against the influence of the eccles- 
iastics who had preached war to their people from the pulpits." 

Appendix III, 33. 
From the Deposition Upon Oath of Captain Hermann Folz, Concerning the 

Events in Aerschot. 9 * 

"... The result was that the revolt was systematically suppressed, 
and the houses were searched for sharp-shooters. At this occasion about 40 
civilians, among them several, at least two, priests were found with weapons 
in their hands." 

Appendix III, 34. 

From a Report Concerning the Events In Etalle.95 

"A witness, who during the shooting, was in the village with a corporal and 
a few of the men in a place opposite the home of the Vicar, observed distinctly, 
as he declared under oath, how a young person, in cassock, was standing 



•2 Akten des Kriegsmlnisterinms. 3320/15 ZVI. 

8S Akten 3421/15 ZVI. 

»* Akten .... 668.1. 15. ZV. 
»s Akten .... No. 1423/15 ZVI. 

68 



behind the window post, holding a book — a prayer book to all appearances 
— in his hand, and the Geneva band around his arm. From time to time 
he stepped in front of the opened window and fired with his revolver upon a 
German corporal in the garden, whom, however, owing to the distance, he did 
not strike. When after a brief time this house was opened by force by 
another witness, as repeated knocking had no result, the Vicar was standing 
close behind the door and presented a ticket identifying him as belonging to 
the Red Cross. He was likewise brought to the church. In searching two 
houses about 20 or 30 bayonets and cavalry sabers and a loaded infantry gun 
were found in an old store room, which, as he said, were used for theater 
plays. When later a sharp-edged sword was found under his cassock, and he 
was asked whether that also was used for plays, he could give no answer. Bl. 
17, 18, 28, 29, 33, 34. 

There is no doubt that this younger person in ecclesiastical garb was the 
Vicar of the place. He was pointed out as such by the older parish priest of 
Etalle to the corporal on guard, who speaks French fluently; and he became 
convinced that the attitude and the exclamations of the inhabitants in the 
church betrayed their intimate acquaintance with him: in short, that he was 
their Vicar. Bl. 34. Since he was caught in the act of hostilities against our 
troops he was dealt with according to usages of war and was hanged. 



«9 



IV. THE GERMAN "CONCEPTION OF WAR." 
A) The French Charges. 

On page two of the French book it is said that the Germans have a new 
and anti-Christian conception of war. "The German Ego refuses to acknowl- 
edge an objective and absolute rule, be it in religion, morals, or law. That 
is literally true, and introduces into the world a completely new law of 
war of which we all are bearing the monstrous consequences."96 Gaudeau 
holds that Kant disconnected legal and moral obligations, and that the 
consequences were very injurious to ethics. But even worse than Kant's 
frank divorce of law and right is, according to Gaudeau, the hypocrisy in 
which the German Ego is clothed. "Falsehood is embedded in the very 

nature and essence of the German Ego The German way of 

thinking repeats all such words as God, religion, Christianity, ideals, right 
and morals, law and justice, but they are merely hollow symbols of the Ger- 
man Ego. This carefully preserved facade serves simply to conceal the deified 
Teutonic I. The "old God" whom William II invokes is literally Germany 
self-deified.97 Germany "is to become 'the world's conscience' according to 
Buelow, and 'Europe's brains,' according to Wilhelm Ostwald." Gaudeau 
takes up those words98 and says that they must be taken in an absolute 
sense: "The German Ego is to replace on earth the true God, the God of 
human reason and of Christianity."^ All laws of war, asserted by Gospel 
and Church, must be overthrown in favor of German egoism, says Gaudeau. 

The German Ego is the standard of justice. What is useful to it is just. 
Every means is justified as long as it serves the German Ego and its ends. 
Mercy in war means hitting hard. Every means is permissible to terrorize 
the enemy: burning, killing, looting, tormenting, all that leads more quickly 
to the goal and is, therefore, to the interest of the opponents themselves. 
With such horrible ideas of barbarism German rule threatens the world. No 
Catholic, no sensible and conscientious man should remain neutral or in- 
different to that savage attitude. 100 Goyau's opinion is the same.i°i indeed, 
all educated France seems to be ridden by that delusion. The professors at 
the Catholic University of Paris proclaim the same thought in their written 
reply. They trace the German world-thought, the idea of universal dominion, 
back to Kant and Nietzsche. They blame the Germans for their conceit, for 
regarding themselves as superior beings and supermen, for claiming the 
right to be above the common rules or modifying them according to this 
arbitrary fancy.i°2 They do not hesitate to pass the following severe judg- 
ment: "For men of action a treaty will only be a scrap of paper which they 
may tear up if it is convenient. 'Scraps' are to such people the rights of weak 
nations that have the misfortune to hinder the progress of a powerful state. 



96 b. 25: ". . . le moi allemand ne reconnait au-dessus de lui dans le monde aucune 
regie objective et absolue, ni religieuse, nl morale, ni juridique. Cela est vrai k la lettre et 
cela IntToduit dans le monde la notion d'un "droit de guerre" absolument nouveau, et dont 
nous subissons les consequences monstrueuses." 

87 B. 25: "Le mensonge est install^ k l'etat eonstirutlonnel, au centre le pins lntime du 
mol allemand. . . . Droit, morale, justice, loi, ideal, Dieu, religion, christlanisme, la 
penssee germanique repete tous ces mots, garde toute cette facade, mais ces mots ne sont 
qu'un vain symbole du moi allemand; cette fagade ne cache que le moi allemand divinise. 
Le 'vleux dieu' qu'invoque Guillaume II c'est, k la lettre, l'Allemagne dlvinisee." 

98 B. 26. 

99 b. 26: ". . . . car le mol allemand dolt rem placer dans le monde le vrai Dlen, 
le Dieu de la ralson bumaine et du christlanisme." 

100 B. 26. 

101 B. 40, seq. 

102 b. 284: ". . . plelns de conflance en leur propre esprit et se tenant eux-memes 
pour des etres superieurs, se sont cru le droit de s'eiever au — dessus des regies communes, ou de 
les falre pller k leur fantaisle?" 

70 



'Scraps' again must be all those restrictions which the unrestrained right of 
force experiences in war. Far from apologizing for acting according to such 
principles they boast of them after the example of Bismarck, the greatest 
among them."io3 

To be brief, Germany recognizes no moral law, her only standard is 
self-interest. Nothing is forbidden to her; all things are permissible, even 
the most disgraceful and outrageous acts as long as they help her progress. 

B) The German Answer. 

y?T is hard, almost impossible, to fight against phantoms and illusions 
I such as we meet here. The charge is substantiated by no actual facts. 
^ Such cannot be established by the mere act of tearing quotations from 
isolated German authors out of their context and presenting them as abso- 
lute theses. The only grain of truth which the charges contain is that there 
are a few individuals in Germany (and they are rare exceptions) who 
hold to the idea that "might is right." Among them we find race-fanatics; 
among them we also find Nietzsche. But this very same Nietzsche, that 
unhappy and gloomy philosopher of aphorisms who had lost all sense of 
tangible realities and could see things but grotesquely distorted, as they 
appeared to his vision when illuminated by the lightning-flashes of his in- 
tuitive conceptions — hardly left any deeper traces on the German mind. 
Moreover, far from being a German enthusiast, he loved to live in Italy 
and was an ardent admirer of the Slavic race and Russian absolutism. Thus 
his sympathies lay chiefly with France's great ally. By the way, Gabriele 
d'Annunzio, about whom we have heard so much of late, is an enthusiastic 
admirer of Nietzsche, who really concerns the German people very little. 
To say that the Kaiser and the whole of Germany embody Nietzsche's ideas 
is such an empty and superficial assertion that only gross ignorance can 
excuse it. 

And good old Kant would turn in his grave if he knew that people look 
to him to account for all the alleged abominations of this war. He is held 
responsible for them because he teaches that man is to act so that his 
actions may become the general exemplar of all men's actions. When the 
professors of the Catholic University of Paris dug up that Kantian sentence 
in order to exploit it for their purposes,i04 did they not perceive that it is 
diametrically opposed to their own theory? All that Kant wanted to say is 
that generalization or nationalization of individual actions brings out their 
rational or irrational characteristics and thus creates a norm and standard 
for action. For example, if an individual thief wants to apply Kant's rule, 
he will find that theft is not permissible; according to Kant, his actions would 
first of all, have to become the general rule, i.e., everybody would have to 
steal first! In that case, all notions of private property and of its theft 
would vanish. Therefore theft, is not permissible. Likewise the supposed 
conception of war would have to be generally accepted. But then all 
civilization would be at an end, and men would not live together in nations. 
The Germans certainly have not that conception of war and Kant most 
decidedly would not accept it. The passage has been altogether misunder- 
stood and twisted to a contrary meaning. The new conception of war only 
exists in the imagination of the over-excited French critics who project and 
utter it. From other points of view critics may attack and repudiate Kant's 
philosophy, which hits the Catholic doctrine hard enough, but the French 
professors of the Catholic University at Paris have selected the most harm- 
less sentence of Kant's teachings to prove the most terrible things. Kant 
must not be held responsible for such a horrible conception of war. 



103 b. 285: "Ponr les hommes (Taction, un traite ne sera qu'un "chiffon de papier" que 
Ton dechire au gre de ses tnterfits; chiffon anssi, le droit de* peuplea faibles qui ont le 
malheur de gCner le progrSs d'un grand Etat; chiffon, tontes les restrictions apportees, dans la 
guerre, au droit llllmlte de la force; et, loin de s'excuser d'agir d'aprSs d« tels principes, lis 
s'en feron't glolre, & l'lmage du plus grand d'entre eux, Bismarck." 

104 B. 285. 

71 



By the way, the influence of Kant's teachings in regard to separation of 
ethics and religion in Germany has been quite insignificant. In France, on 
the other hand, in every State and Public school "morals" are taught as a 
subject apart from religion. The charges of the French Catholics should 
therefore be rather directed against their own country. 

Quite as untenable is Gaudeau's theory of the deified German Ego. It is 
a phantasmagoria so flimsy and filmy that the first serious thought must 
destroy it. The German Emperor in exhorting his people "go to church 
and pray to God!" and doing so himself, is said to adore deified Germany 
and even his own self. That is an absurd, inconceivable thought and it is 
not to be wondered at that the author tries to make his assertion believable 
by calling the Germans rank hypocrites, who simply keep up an "outward 
show" (facade). Gaudeau follows in the footsteps of his countryman Auguste 
Comte, whose ideas he wants to apply to Germany. Thus the religion of 
Germany is made to resemble that of the totem tribesmen. 

All the minor French arguments are equally false. Major-General Sten- 
ger is said to have ordered the killing of prisoners and wounded.ios This 
charge is repeated by B6dier.i<>6 Conscientious enquiries have convinced 
the author that Stenger's alleged order of the day never was given out — 
neither in writing nor orally. 

Another fable has caused much uncalled-for indignation. A new meaning 
is applied to the old phrase: "c'est la guerre"; it embodies the belief that 
everything is allowed in times of war, so we are informed; German officers 
and men have used that expression by way of apology when their attention 
had been called to durous events of the war. "Officers," says Bishop Turinaz 
in his pastoral letter, "would call themselves good Catholics; soldiers would 
show their rosaries and scapulars; and these same men being reproached 
would tell you: C'est la guerre. They are taught, then, that in war all 
crimes and all atrocities are permitted."i07 

That answer, "c'est la guerre," has nothing in common with the mean- 
ing the pastoral assumes. It merely signifies that in times of war all kinds 
of terrible things do happen, necessary and unnecessary things, things that 
are allowed and things that are not. But the same men answering thus know 
to distinguish between acts that may be excused and such that are trans- 
gressions of the moral law, and deplore every infamous and abominable 
deed even in war. Bedier (although he wants to prove something entirely 
different), may be cited as witness. He refers to a facsimilized page of a 
diary in which a German soldier speaks of a rude act committed by a com- 
rade in a church. Angrily he exclaims: "How can there be such creatures." 
The same soldier relates how a militia-man tries to abuse the young daughter 
of his host and threatens with his bayonet the father whose interference 
foils his attempt At once the soldier's conscience is aroused and he vents 
his feelings by irately exclaiming: "How is it possible that such things 
happen!" And he finds consolation in the thought that the guilty ones 
cannot escape. "That fellow," he writes, "now is awaiting his just punish- 
ment," and he signifies his satisfaction over the fact by underscoring these 
words. Unfortunately B6dier neglected to translate that last sentence !ios 

Unrestrained hatred only can account for another insinuation. In relat- 
ing how the German prisoners in the cathedral at Reims rested on straw 
which had been piled up by the Germans themselves, the French book asks 
whether that straw was to serve solely as resting place for the soldiers.109 
Every reader thereby is led to believe that the Germans obviously intended 
to set fire to the cathedral. 

French thought is often very one-sided, and anxiously clings to external 
events without considering the inner motives. In 1870-71, the diplomatic 
and military history of Germany attained a solution which the French 



105 B. 139. 

106 Bedier, p. 29, 39, 40. 

107 B. 245: "Des offlciers Be declarent bone cathollques, dee soldata man t rent lean chapelets 
et lenrs scapulaires, et aux reproches qui leur sont adresses, lis rgpondent: Cest la guerre." 
On leur enseigne done que la guerre ante-rise tons lea crimes, toutes les atroclteal" 

108 Bedier, p. 25. 

100 B. 90: "etalt-ce uniquement poor serrlr de couch* a lenrs soMate?" 

72 



characterize as a policy of might, whose typical representative is Bismarck. 
But they overlook the fact that the outcome above all has been due to moral 
strength. During the forty years of its existence the German Empire has shown 
the abundance of moral sentiment and strength with which it is possessed. It 
has perfected its system of national defense, and in order to do so, a strong 
and united will was necessary, and the profession of a national ideal the 
material foundation of which had to be safeguarded. Above all, in the most 
varying spheres of life Germany has accomplished successes which could 
not have been achieved without moral and religious backbone. The Empire is 
composed of many States, but how magnificent has been its organizing power 
in this war. Such wonderful co- and subordination presupposes intellectual 
and moral strength. The Emperor knew exactly what a powerful weapon 
the army was in his hand. He knew the secrets of Krupp's guns and of the 
submarine war. If he had been guided by the mere policy of might, he would 
have seized more favorable opportunities and would have struck long ago. 
But religious and moral forces kept his sword sheathed. And the great 
mass of the German population is also free from the principle of the policy 
of might and from the lust of conquest of which they are wrongly accused. 
Moreover, strong moral forces are apparent in Germany's social legislation, 
rivalled by no other State in the world. 

Regrettable events in the war are judged quite differently by the French 
and Germans. No German dreams of holding French army leaders, or Joffre, 
or the French nation responsible for misdeeds done by French soldiers. But 
the French endeavor to attribute individual offences of German soldiers to 
an army system and to a particular war-idea and to make the Emperor, the 
army, and the whole German nation responsible for those offenses. That 
does not correspond with justice and truth. 



73 



V. MISREPRESENTATIONS OF GERMAN KULTUR. 
A) The French Charges. 

The authors of the French book have once for all defined German "cul- 
ture" as uncivilized and barbarous. One of them, whose essays on 
religious conditions in Germany have been awarded a prize, and are 
appreciated at least by some German thinkers, Georges Goyau, has written a 
special essay to define German "culture" in which the word "culture" is 
always contemptuously enclosed in quotation marks. 

Goyau starts with the "evangelical" German Kaiserdom, and assigns to 
the history of the new Empire two phases of development wherein German 
"culture" endeavors to assert itself. First of all, its direction is inward, 
desirous to conquer the Catholic third of the German population. In the 
second place, "culture" takes an outward direction. In both cases German 
"culture" shows brutal characteristics. In the first case its brutality 
is proved by the incarceration of priests and bishops and the vexation of 
the Catholic people. In the present war, German "culture" slew "on Wal- 
loon, Flemish and Lorraine soil a certain number of martyrs who were 
suspects because they were priests, and who were shot because they were 
suspects."no 

Churches fared no better. Every modern means of destruction was 
applied to them. Since archaeology had discovered that Gothic cathedrals 
were the work of French architects, "nothing protected them longer against 
the assault of 'culture,' because they were born of French genius and because 
they sheltered 'Roman superstitions': both crimes deserved death. 
And the death sentence was passed. The cannons carried it into effect."m 

What then is the nature of this culture and whither does it strive? 
That question is answered by Goyau who identifies German "culture" with 
Protestantism. Germany is a Protestant country, hence she ought to rule 
over the Latin races. William II, thus Goyau's logic proceeds, eagerly em- 
braced that idea. He regards himself as pope of the Protestant Church. In 
order to secure that fatherly position, he went to Geneva, the home of Cal- 
vinism, supported the evangelical community which had been established at 
Rome, and even went to Jerusalem for the consecration of the Protestant 
church of the Holy Redeemer. Even in Spain and Austria he sought to 
pave the way for Protestantism. Germany gave her active support to the 
"Los von Rom" movement ("Away from Rome") in Austria, and to 
Fliedner's activity in Spain. Hence German culture is nothing else but 
Protestantism. 

Protestantism, however, is by no means Christianity. German philoso- 
phers deny the distinction between good and evil which Christianity asserts. 
Evil works out good, but everything is good which promotes German thought. 
That end sanctifies every means. There is no higher moral law. If the 
Latin nations refuse to submit willingly to German "culture," it serves them 
right if they are compelled to do so, be the means just or not. Gospel, 
treaties and international law signify nothing. Germany must expand. That 
inbred desire to expand and to conquer, that historic development, is the 
"old German god" who, in the opinion of some Germans, is entirely distinct 



hob. 32 and 321; "le second Culturkampf, celul de 1914, a couchg star le so) wallon, sur 
le sol flamsnd, sur le sol lorrain, un certain nombre de martyrs, suspects parce que prfitres et 
fusilles parce que suspects." 

in B. 32: "Rlen ne les protegealt plus, des lors, contre les assauts de la 'culture': 
d'etre les fllles du genie francais et d'etre hospitalieres ft la 'superstition romalne,' c'fetaient 
lft deux pgches dignes de mort. Et la sentence de mort fut rendue, et les canons l'executerent." 

74 



from the God of the Jews. The "old German god" is the pagan deity of 
elemental force, is Wotan, Odin, Thor. Hence Germany feels that she must 
break with Luther. "It may be that Luther is typical of the very cream 
and essence of German manhood and virility. Yet, Luther's Christ remains 
a Jew, while the German divinity is Wotan. Wotan is German to the core — 
kerndeutsch."H2 All the dreaming, all the yearning of Germany is God's 
will. Hence let Germany, with all her heart and soul, return to the old pagan 
mythology, and worship Thor. Thus certain Pan-Germans cry out. 

So German "culture" appears at first as Protestantism, but at the end 
of the indictment as old Germanic paganism, inspired by "hatred against 
Rome, hatred against the Latin name, hatred against Romanic civilization, 
hatred against Christ."H3 

B) The German Answer. 

consistent unity pervades the whole French book although it is com- 
posed of essays by various writers. Thus Goyau's conception of Ger- 
man "culture" is retained throughout the book and album. 

The first illustration in the album is a reproduction from "Jugend," 
representing a growling giant with gaping jaws. His left arm embraces one 
of the two towers of a church, whilst his mailed right rests on a parapet. 
A quotation from Heine's "Deutschland" is added. Christianity, says Heine, 
has appeased the old brutal Germanic lust of fighting, but the talisman 
of the Cross will collapse. Then Thor will rise and smash, with his giant's 
hammer, the Gothic cathedrals. "And Thor has risen," the album explains.!!* 

Thor and his giant's sledge open the series of pictures of demolished 
churches. The "culture" war of the Germans sweeps across Belgian and 
French lands like a destructive hurricane, and the first victims it demands 
are the masterworks of religious art. The words of Heine are hardly per- 
tinent; they bear no reference to Belgian or French, but to German cathe- 
drals as the context clearly shows. Heine invites the other nations to 
witness the spectacle of "mad Berserk fury," but the French neighbors are 
to take care "not to concern themselves about things which we do at home 
in Germany."H5 Even the quoted passage clearly implies no more than that. 

Again and again, the quotations given by the French writers are most 
unhappy. For example, the album illustrates the bombardment of the Reims 
cathedral, and the appended text states that thus the ardent desire of Joseph 
von Goerres, the great Catholic adversary of France, was fulfilled. "Was it 
not J. J. Goerres who wrote as early as April, 1814, in the "Rheinische 
Merkur";ii6 "Tear it down and pulverize it, that basilica of Reims! Set fire 
to the cathedral where Clovis (Clodwig) was crowned and where the Empire 
of the Franks arose."H7 We carefully looked through the "Rheinische 
Merkur," but were unable to discover the thundering philippic in the April 
number of 1814, nor in any other issue of that or the following year. To 
make quite sure we wrote to the editor of the Collected Works of Goerres, 
and that gentleman confirmed our own conclusions, us Anyhow, the quoted 
passage does not occur where the album locates it. 

But most probably Goerres never wrote those words. In numerous 
passages he expresses his abhorrence of wrong and violence. We may refer, 
for instance, to No. 1 of January 23, 1814, No. 40 of April 11, 1814, or to 
No. 284 of August 16, 1815, in which he publishes a communication of a 
militia-man against those who pillage in the enemy's country and adds: 
"Man never should become a monster, especially not in a war worthy of 
most precious laurels." Francois Veuillot, too, quotes Goerres' supposed 



112 B. 44: "Encore que Luther soit le type de l'homme allemand, <le l'honime kerndeutseh, 
le Christ de Luther demeure un Julf: avec Wotan, on a le dieu allemand, le dleu kerndeutsch." 

113 B. 46. 

114 A. 1. 

115 Heine, "Deutschland" I, Leipzig, Hesse, Ausgabe Karpeles, VII, p. 110. 

116 Koblenz. Gedruckt bey B. Heriot. 

117 A. 10 and 11. 

118 Cf. Appendix V., 1. 

75 



ravings,H9 in order to prove that German hearts long since glowed with 
hatred against the cathedral of Reims. His great uncle has been falsely- 
accused of having uttered a very wicked word. He at least should know 
how poisonous such slander is, and should have been careful all the more 
to make use of a quotation that is nowise verified. 

The bombardment of the cathedral of Reims cannot be regarded as 
barbarian vandalism, because military necessity alone was responsible for 
it, and not barbarism, or destructive mania. The German army-command, 
having evidence that the cathedral was used for military purposes, was 
compelled to bombard it. As soon as it noticed that the sanctuary no longer 
served military purposes, the bombardment ceased. 

The French book specially emphasizes that Cardinal Lugon and, in 
his name, Canon Landrieux have repeatedly declared that "at no time an 
observation post has been placed on the towers, or a battery in the cathedral 
grounds."i20 what is the German answer? Official German documents say 
that aviators ascertained the existence of an observation post and a signal 
station on the cathedral. Only when observation through the periscope had 
proved the existence of a signal station, did Headquarters sanction the 
bombardment, with the proviso that the observations were indubitable. The 
officers in command looked through the periscope themselves, and saw the 
signalling going on. The "Times?" of September 22, 1914, ascribes the bom- 
bardment to the fact that the French had placed artillery in the city. The 
"Illustration" of September 26th, 1914, says that on September 13 an electric 
search-light had been placed on the northern tower. In the issue of the 
same magazine of October 19, the maitre de chapelle, Abbe Thinot, con- 
firms that fact in a signed article, while it is still more clearly described in 
the English publication "The Wine and Spirit Trade Record," of November 
8, 1914.121 

If in spite of this, the French reports are to be credited, at least the bom- 
bardment should not be branded as barbarism. It would be fair to assume 
that the Germans had made a mistake. But this is not done because evil 
intentions of the opponent are taken for granted. 

The whole German nation was jubilant, it is said, when their most 
ardent wish was fulfilled and the cathedral was bombarded.122 This sen- 
tence contains two untrue assertions. For one thing, the Germans never 
desired such an event as the bombardment of the cathedral, and secondly, 
Germany never rejoiced when it happened. The passages quoted from the 
"Berliner Tageblatt" nowhere mention the cathedral, and speak in a general 
way only of the magnificent splendor of the city. But even supposing said 
paper had the cathedral in mind, the generalization would remain untrue 
all the same. Germany, far from wishing to see the cathedral destroyed, 
dreaded such an event, and when it occurred the fate of the sanctuary was 
lamented everywhere. It is of no significance whatever that the "Berliner 
Lokal-Anzeiger" published a poem of an infidel rhymester who rejoices 
because the bells of the cathedral have ceased to ring, and the Germans 
have sealed with lead the portals of the "Maison d'idolatrie." No faithful 
Christian — and the great majority of the German people is Christian, — much 
less a Catholic, will approve of such fanaticism. They rather condemn the 
breach of confessional peace perpetrated by the above-named Berlin journal, 
and it is a deplorable falsehood to claim that that poem is nothing but a 
lyric expression of the "pensee allemande"i23 or the "sentiment unanime."i24 

Artistic sentiment even would restrain the Germans from such wilful 
destruction. During that raging battle which the Germans fought under 
the leadership of Major von Manteuffel, measures were taken to save the 
Town Hall of Louvain. The art treasures of St. Peter's Cathedral at Louvain 
were brought, as far as was feasible, to the less menaced Town Hall. The 



119 b. 125. 

120 B. 126. 

121 Cf. Appendix V, 2. 

122 A. 13. 

123 B. 88. 

124 A. 13. 



76 



Swedish Deputy, Dr. Charles Hildebrand, specially mentions that fact,i25 and 
asks whether such troops can be called barbarians. 

But the French ultra-nationalists believe that the Germans are capable 
of any barbarous act. Forty-five years ago, it is said, the German 'intellect- 
uals" were lost in admiration when the tower of the Strassburg Muenster 
was bombarded. So Veuillot assures us,i26 and relates on the testimony 
of Andre" Michel, conservator of the Louvre, that General von Werder was 
made Doctor of Philosophy h. c. by the University of Freiburg i. B. for 
having shot down the finial of the spire and for having smashed the precious 
stained windows. Such the honors, we are told, German "culture" bestows 
upon those that bombard churches.127 The historian Heinrich Finke, at 
present professor of history at the same University, has searched the archives 
with the following result. On February 6th, 1871, Werder received an 
honorary degree because in the opinion of many his victories in January 
had prevented the invasion of Southern Germany by the enemy — whatever 
cause there may have been for such apprehensions. "Enthusiasm because of 
a deliverance from serious danger has filled our city and its intellectual 
centre, our University," it says verbatim in Prof. Dubois Reymond's state- 
ment of reasons.128 Quite as absurd as the Werder myth is the narrative 
that the Prussian Government, in the reign of Frederick William III, wanted 
to carry Lutheranism, the foster-mother of Germanism, into Latin lands, 
and for that reason entered into negotiations with the Pope.129 

It is incomprehensible that so highly educated a man as Goyau can 
caricature German "culture" so hideously as he has done. All cultural 
endeavors are meant to satisfy human needs. Those who have no needs 
can never have culture. Animals have no culture; their instincts adapt 
themselves to their natural environments, they have no higher aspirations. 
The animal goes to rest when it becomes dark while man endeavors to 
master nature. He produces fire by friction, he then uses a pine torch to 
enlighten darkness. But he is not satisfied and continues his search. And 
so he succeeds in inventing other lighting contrivances — candles, oil lamps, 
gas and electric light. And what may be said of this particular case pertains 
to all other necessities of life. Thus man rises to a higher level of civiliza- 
tion. 

Progress, however, is not confined to material life; it extends to intellec- 
tual life as well. Intellectual culture aspires to the true in science, to the good 
in morals, and to the beautiful in art. These aspirations are never satisfied 
to the full extent; there is always a longing and craving for the heights of 
perfection; needs ramify and grow more refined; cultural mechanism becomes 
complex and illimitable to the eye. The highest culture and its crowning 
piece is religious culture which embraces and unifies all departments of life. 

If Goyau, therefore, wanted to describe German culture, he ought to 
have gathered in the first place cultural facts in all manifestations of life; 
and if then he would have proceeded to prove that rich variety of individual 
achievements as sprouting forth from one single idea: then his would have 
been a wonderful deed. But in that case he would have discovered, in the 
course of his investigations, the impossibility of explaining the whole of 
German culture presupposing a religious uniformity. As a matter of fact, 
Germany is the land of religious dissensions and this fact should not be 
overlooked. There is a specific Catholic religious culture in Germany, and 
there is a specific non-Catholic religious culture, which again is split and 
appears in the concrete as several religious cultures. One of the latest of 
these is the cult of Wotan — if that really can be called a "religious" culture. 
In fact it is diametrically opposed to religion. 

In taking a bird's eye view, so to speak, of Germany's religious culture, 
we look down upon a widely ramified network of rivers and canals. For a 
long time all were fed by the powerful current of Catholicism which has its 



126 Ein Btarkes Volk, Berlin, Mittler. S. 72. 

126 b. 125. 

127 B. 87. 

128 "Frankfurter Ztg.," June 8, 1915. 

129 B. 36. 

77 



hidden source in the Supernatural and its visible one in Rome. In the 
course of history a dike burst. Rushing out the water found a new bed to 
which a great part of the German population sought access, while another 
part kept up its connection with the old stream, the dikes of which had 
been re-inforced. By far the greatest part of the German people and the 
German country is governed in its religious culture by Catholic and Evan- 
gelical Christianity. There are also Germans that will have nothing 
to do with Christianity, as such may be found in any country of the globe. 
Among them there is a small group particularly noticeable that disavows 
any connection with Catholic and Evangelical Christianity and digs its own 
canal which leads straight into the arid desert of paganism. This group 
of neo-pagans prevails in Austria rather than in the German Empire. Here 
we have Wotan's loyal adherents. And Goyau, while the French survey does 
not concern itself with Austria at all, commits the grave mistake to deal 
only with this insignificant organization, blind for all else, and to accuse 
the entire German "culture" of paganism. 

It is true that there are in Germany people who dream and speak of 
an "Evangelical" Empire, but neither in political law nor in reality does 
such a thing exist. The German Emperor personally professes the Evangeli- 
cal faith and is the head of the Evangelical Church. But the German State 
is not Evangelical. The "Kulturkampf" which wanted to force the Catholic 
Church into a more dependent attitude towards the State in Prussia and 
in Germany in general, proved a failure. Emperor and Pope concluded 
peace. Since that time, the religious conditions of Catholics are better 
regulated in Germany than in most other European countries. It is plain 
nonsense to identify German "culture" with Protestantism, since the Catholic 
Church in Germany is a religious institution recognized by the State. Even 
if only the moral side of German culture is at issue, Goyau's endeavors are 
inadequate. He could have inferred its real value from this war alone. 
Because war reveals the innermost characteristics of nations according to 
their worth and unworthiness. Could it be imagined that in Germany the 
property of alien enemies is looted and destroyed, as it has been looted 
and destroyed in Russia, England and Italy? Where have dum-dum bullets 
been found in large quantities? Where are prisoners of war and civilians 
placed under the command of colored soldiers and made to work in loin- 
cloths? Which country wants to starve women and children of the enemy? 
When military cripples were exchanged, thanks to the Pope's endeavors, 
France sent a part of these poor men who would have been so glad to get 
home again back to hospitals where their families could not communicate 
with them. Are they champions of true culture and civilization who are 
fighting shoulder to shoulder with Turcos, Senegalese, Arabs, Hindoos, Goork- 
has, Sikhs, Kirgise, Tartars, Tscherkesse, Kalmucks, Turkmans, Tschunguse 
and hordes of every description ?i30 A report will shortly be issued about 
the "cultural deeds" of the colored people with whom the Allies make 
common cause. The report will be compiled from diaries of French officers 
and men.i3i Then Goyau will have an opportunity to study "culture" in 
quotation marks. But that is not the German culture. 

C) APPENDICES TO V. 

Appendices V. 1 and V. 2 have reference to the firing upon the Cathedral 
of Reims. Appendices V. 3 to V. 5 illustrate some French cultural condi- 
tions. 

Appendix V, 1. 

Aix-la-Chapelle, June 4, 1915. 
Dear Professor: A couple of weeks ago Dr. Cardauns referred to this 
alleged expression of Goerres in the "Koelnische Volkszeitung 1 ," and rejected it, 
owing to the result of my investigations. At that time I notified him that 



ISO Which country claims the Minister who did not shrink from killing a man In order to do 
away with a person that was inconvenient to England? 

131 Employment, contrary to International Law, of colored troops upon the European arena 
of war by England and France. Foreign Office. 

78 



according to my belief such an expression from the mouth of Goerres is 
impossible. However, I was not satisfied with an assertion a priori, but looked 
through the volumes 14 and 15, which I have here before me, and I found 
nothing. On the contrary from his utterances concerning Paris and its capture 
we may conclude that he places in God's hand all punishment, and does not at 
all desire a chastisement through fire and sword by the allies. (Cf. essays in 
No. 12, 16.) It is, of course, intelligible enough that he demands the restitution 
of the treasures of art taken from elsewhere. Good use may be made of the 
very pertinent remark concerning the French papers in No. 3, Review of the 
latest events. — I have looked once more through the essays in question in vol- 
ume 14 from January to April, and again I found nothing. And thus I can only 
repeat that such or a similar expression is not to be found in the "Rheinsche 
Merkur." Nor did I find anything like it in other writings of Goerres; the 
great friend of arts that Goerres was could not write in that way. 
I am always ready for further service. 

Yours respectfully, 

Dr. W. Schellberg. 

Appendix V, 2. 

Extract from "The Wine and Spirit Trade Record," London, No. 487, vol. 43, 
p. 974 (November 8, 1914). 

Note: The London wine merchant, Prank Hedges Butler, left London 
towards the middle of September to go to Champagne. He came also to Reims. 
Here is what the magazine has to say about his sojourn there: 

"The day after his arrival at Reims he visited the cathedral and from the 
top of one of the towers witnessed the fighting. At the top he found tele- 
phones, electric lights, soldiers' beds and a bottle of Moet and Chandon's cham- 
pagne. Red Cross flags were mounted there because of the German wounded 
having been taken into the cathedral." 

Appendix V, 3. 
Open Letter to Monsignor Dr. Alfred Bandrillart, 

Rector of the Institut Catholique of Paris, the author of the work: La guerre 

allemande et le Catholicisme. 

Rt. Rev. Monsignor: I have seen you once in my life. It was in a memo- 
rable place. You were in the sacristy of the church of the Institut Catholique 
in Paris, which before the revolution belonged to the Carmelites. I went with 
your sexton to the corridor adjoining the sacristy and saw the spot where, on 
September 2, 1792, a large number of your "confreres" were led two and two 
before an unlawful court and immediately massacred. Through the open door 
my eye saw the garden, where the butchery began, until the victims were driven 
into the church, where with death before their eyes they imparted to each 
other the absolution. Through the other door I saw you in the act of putting 
on the sacred vestments to celebrate High Mass. And then I descended into 
the crypt, to offer at the tomb of these unfortunate victims a tribute of admi- 
ration and veneration to those who died martyrs of their conviction, although 
they could have saved their lives with a word of lie. Deeply moved I left the 
spot so seldom visited by your countrymen. Within two hours 120 priests were 
murdered here under the pretence of judicial procedure. The proceedings of 
the court lasted then about two minutes for each one. That is what one may 
call prompt justice; after the massacre the villainous murderers shouted: Vive 
la nation. That was to your nation, Rt. Rev. Monsignor. You know also that 
the most influential historian of the present republic, Monsieur Aulard, did not 
only extenuate but defended outright these and the other massacres of Sep- 
tember. You know also that Aulard's ethical catechism has replaced the 
Catholic catechism in tne schools of France. 

But you accuse us Germans before the Catholic world. If you would take 
the trouble and gather from all the chronicles and other sources of German 
history, the number of ecclesiastical ministers of the Catholic and Protestant 
denomination, who, in the most difficult times of German history, during the 
16th and 17th centuries, were executed or murdered for their convictions, you 
would fall very short of the number of victims massacred within one hour 
"aux Carmes." 

Further, those victims of the September massacres were not put to death 
by the enemies of their people, but by their own people. And to do this the 
mockery of a judicial court was resorted to. 

You, Rt. Rev. Monsignor, aware of this very earnest admonition of the 
world's history, think it reconcilable with your conscience, to reproach a peo- 
ple, who for centuries have been law-abiding, with barbarism. Just ponder in 
calm examination, what you in your position of scholar and priest, owe to the 
truth. You are under the influence of an hypnosis, such as instigated the mur- 
derers of September to their ghastly deeds. You judge like them without giv- 
ing even a minute's hearing to your victims. 

Aloys Schulte, Dr. Phil, et jur. hon. c. 
Ordinary professor of history at the university of Bonn. 

79 



Appendix V, 4. 
The French Fear of Trath.132 

General Headquarters, June 10. 

The well known Gazette des Ardennes, whick appears in the occupied 
French territory in an edition of 90,000 copies, and is read widely by the 
French population, publishes in No. 53 the following characteristic communica- 
tion: 

"List of the French wounded returned to their country." 

We publish herewith besides our list of prisoners a catalogue of those that 
were seriously wounded, have returned as exchange prisoners to their country, 
and are now in France. This list, which is to be continued, has for its object 
to inform the families of the whereabouts of their relatives. For this reason 
we point out in each case the manner of the wounds received. This publication 
seems to correspond to a duty of humanity, which is the more urgent as we 
have good reasons to believe that the relatives of these unfortunate ones are 
not always informed as to what happened to them, since the republic continues 
to hide its seriously wounded soldiers. 

Letters from France continue to arrive in the German military hospitals 
intended for wounded prisoners who long since have returned to their country. 
And hence our question, published in No. 46 of the Gazette des Ardennes, con- 
tinues to stand, and the following conclusion imposes itself: 

The French government does not want these invalids to return to the life 
of the nation. It fears that their lips made earnest from the pains suffered, will 
uncover some of the truth concerning their treatment in Germany, which the 
government holds back from the French people, with the object of not hinder- 
ing those disreputable endeavors, which consist in nourishing a blind hatred 
against the German people. 

Then follow the first 200 names of the exchange prisoners, amongst them 
those of numerous officers. 

W. Scheuermann, 

Appendix V, 5. 

Extracts from Letters of German Prisoners, Interned In Dahomey. 133 

Letter of a chief engineer, November 15, 1914: 

"For seven weeks I languished as a prisoner in the hands of the French 

in the interior of French Africa. At the capture of I just saved my 

life, all other things I lost. Only the clothes I had on my body were left to me. 
In rags and neglected, with the hardest and most degrading labor, I try to 
sustain my wretched life, in the hope that salvation will come soon. Only the 
thought of you keeps up my courage. At night, while lying on the straw mat- 
ting on the ground, brooding for hours over what may have become of you, as 
I have heard nothing from you since the beginning of July. As this letter is 
carefully examined by strangers I cannot give you any further information. 

This much is certain, that neither you nor my dear children would recog- 
nize me in the dull, bent and ragged laborer, if you had a chance of seeing me." 

The same writer, November 28, 1914, under the supposition that the first 
letter may not have reached its destination: 

"I wish to inform you that I am still living in spite of the terrible fatigues 
and depression of soul, and I hope that I will survive happily all tortures. 
Within recent time I have been dispensed from heavy bodily labor, 
because my heart refuses." 

And on December 2, 1914 f 

"To my greatest sorrow I heard yesterday from French sources that our 
sojourn here may last still four or five months. Up to that time I surely will 
have become insane, if no other affliction takes me away. Life here is so 
humiliating and soul-killing that an intelligent man cannot hold out for long. 
I received the advice to write to you for the necessary clothing. I am just 
clothed with rags; I patched up my trousers repeatedly, but they are so used 
up that new holes appear again and again, and I cannot hide my nakedness. 
My feet are covered with rags, my tropical helmet falls to pieces. The impos- 
sibility of washing myself properly engenders very bad skin diseases. 

In the day time we have 50 degrees of heat, and at night sharp, cold winds. 
Through sleeping on the ground I contracted a severe cough, which has been 
torturing me for weeks. 

I have gone through terrible ordeals." 

On February 14, 1915, a stenographed letter from 

"We all suffer terribly. We are abused like criminals, we are beaten and 
get nothing to eat. If that lasts much longer, we shall all perish. We are 
all sick; three have died. We fear the worst for the rainy season. Can you do 
nothing towards our deliverance? But it must be done in all haste. 

"My health is good, but everything else is beneath criticising, because we 
are treated worse than criminals." 

January 22, 1915 an officer writes: 

"The march up to this place was very difficult. We are guarded here most 
strictly. 



132 Appeared in the "Germania," Berlin, June 15, 1915. 
138 Published In many German papers, June 10-12, 1915. 

80 



Our imprisonment here is really shameful; we all feel that with great 
depression. I have stood well the great fatigues of the march up here, and I 
owe my iron health and my healthy body to . . . 

My boots and other belongings are all torn. We do our own cooking and 
washing; we are not permitted to keep servants." 

On February 15, 1915, from 

"I can still report the best with regard to my health. Many a poor com- 
rade of mine of this place cannot write the same thing to his home." 

On February 3, 1915, from 

"... You would lift your hands in astonishment if I could tell you 
all just as it is. Why do the people at home care so little for the colonials, 
and refuse them all help and relief? It is quite likely that many a one wished 
to have been struck by a bullet rather than to live this wretched existence. 
A man in jail is decidedly better off than we, and from this you may get some 
understanding as to our life. The heart burns in the bosom if you are bound 
to see this misery every day. May this letter be a saving angel to us." 

From a report of a German lady, who also at first was a prisoner, and 
describes the horrible treatment: 

". . . . That was about the treatment accorded to the prisoners along 
the coast, the poor man in the interior fared a great deal worse. From 

they had to march 30 kilometers every day. They received no 

coffee in the morning nor any other drink; at noon they stopped on the road 
and received the first breakfast. A large part of the men became weak; they 
had then to remain on the road until the auto came to take them. These 
tours were too much of a strain for Europeans; even the negroes found them 
hard. The French officers were carried in hammocks. During the transporta- 
tion some of the men took sick from fatigues, and two died on the road. At 
first the French took the half invalids to the coast, but after three days they 
were sent to the interior. A merchant, who was amongst them, died during 
the march. 

The men were not allowed to take more than 30 kilograms of baggage; 
they could carry no field beds but only chairs. Their luggage was hauled in 
auto trucks. Some of the men had lost their boots; an officer had only one 
pair that was half torn at the time he was on the steamer. The same was 
the case with clothes; many had lost everything. They helped each other as 
far as they could; but now in the interior none can have anything left, because 
eight months have already elapsed. We learned that they were put with bare- 
feet to work on the roads, and had no clothes left. Houses there were none, 
nor did they have any fly nets; the report is that many are sick. 

A Frenchman, the son of the 1st officer, was himself in 

and related of the conditions existing there. There was an intimate friendship 
between the two, whence it came is unintelligible to me. . . he was 
informed on everything planned concerning us; he said little, but what he said 

was founded on truth. There were, he said, 300 men from Kamerun in A 

They were forced to cut stones and build roads under the supervision of the 
black. They were put to work with bare feet and in the greatest heat. They 
lived in straw huts and slept on straw mattings without mosquito nets. The 
Frenchman himself is reported to have said that they were treated like black 
prisoners. The poor unfortunate ones, who were not used to such hard labor, 
and then too in that tropical heat, with insufficient food; it is unheard of. 
The black brought us also the war news, and some came to bring us the 
latest. 

In the legs of a wounded man were tied together above the 

knees, and thus he was left the night. He had a wound in the upper arm. He 
told us also of a brother of the missionary . . .who was cast into the 
prison of the natives. It was said he had no more clothes, was forced to sleep 
on a straw matting stretched on a stone floor, and his food was abominable." 

On February 21, 1915, a prisoner writes: 

"We have it very warm here now, 40 or 5C degrees in the shade; to work 
under that condition is very bitter. 

So far not one of my companions has received anything from home." 

A telegram through the ambassador in Madrid, that: 

"Prisoners of war in Dahomey are employed in work's on the roads. They 
have little in the line of clothes, shoes and quinine, four are dead, many sick." 

On November 15, 1914, letter of a merchant: 

"With scanty food we are compelled to do hard labor for seven hours every 
day in this tropical climate." 

The same on November 22, 1914: 

"Our condition at present is absolutely wretched." 

A letter from an English prison camp: 

"From a reliable source we know that the German prisoners in Dahomey 
are forced to labor in the interior under supervision of the black on farms and 
at road building; for all clothes they have a band around the hips. Several 
of them have died." 

A woman testifies: 

That the prisoners in Dahomey are compelled to do hard labor for seven 
hours in the intense tropical heat. 

81 



An official of the government writes: 

"... A missionary in my vicinity was clubbed to death with great 
knives by the negroes in sympathy with England; a corporal with his four 
colored soldiers was eaten up; another German division surprised the allies of 
England as they were preparing a meal of human flesh, and cleaning the 
bones of Europeans." 

A chief engineer reports on March 16, 1915: 

"We were informed yesterday that over a hundred of our letters had been 
destroyed, because they were too long; hence I must make my more important 
communications in about fifteen lines. I am still "vegetating," although the 
little flame of hope to see you again grows dimmer right along. Many more 
months will pass before we can return home. I am still waiting in vain for 
money and package. Why? My quinine is declining. If I fall into a fever I 
am lost. Send me in any case a small box of quinine capsules. May God 
keep you all, as I hope He will do with me. 

Ever Tours 

The same on April 4, 1915: 

"Unfortunately I forgot to ask for the most necessary, a mosquito net and 
quinine. That will be my ruin. The reaper Death cuts mercilessly with his 

sickle amongst us. Yesterday we buried , with whom I often 

spoke about the return to our families. For a long time I have not been able 
to write, because I was in prison; today I was released from it." 

EXTRACTS FROM LETTERS FROM NORTH AFRICA. 

Another soldier writes from North Africa, February 5, 1915: 
"We are treated like the worst criminals, and I say this for the public. 
Are all so weak; does a German in the colonies count for nothing any more, 
and is there no help forthcoming? We are dying from starvation and maltreat- 
ment; if salvation does not come soon, there will be many dead." 
A man of the "Landwehr" writes on February 14, 1915: 

"Some of the days at present are very hot. If only we were there (at the 
new place of work) ; for the march there is very fatiguing, and it is apt to be 
very hot. Things are getting worse right along; we have to work on the road 
on which we march for three and one-half hours. They are now practicing 
their rage upon us. The wind is very strong here, and the sand is blown about. 
Often we cannot see a thing and are expected to walk without spectacles. The 
skin of the face tears open and the sand causes inflammation, and nowhere a 
physician. The desert is like a heap of graVel and we are forced to run about 
on it all day long. Quite a few have lost the soles from under their boots." 
A grenadier of the guard reports from Morocco, February 15, 1915: 
"Many of our companions have died of fever. The heat in March and April 
Is said to be unbearable. It is to be hoped that we won't have to work then 
under that scorching sun. We are employed here in building roads; sometimes 
I have to work in the stone quarry, and so I may act the stone cutter in the 
future. We did get that thing, but now it has been taken from us. The reason 
given for it :s the saying: 'As you to us, so we to you." As the French pris- 
oners are treated at home, so will we be treated here. We sleep in tents on 
orange boxes. If they leave them to us, it will be better than right on the 
ground. Everything is modeled after the prisoners in Germany." 

A corporal of the sanitary department writes on March 16, 1915: 
"The treatment of prisoners prescribed by the French government defies 
all description. . . While on the march we camped at night either in open 
stables on horse manure, or in small tents on the bare ground. The prisoners 
are compelled to work here at road building: and this work is extremely hard 
In the great heat we are having. As a compensation we receive 15 cen- 
times for nine hours labor and a march of ten kilometers. The time allotted 
for eating at noon is only three-quarters of an hour. There is very little water, 
and we cannot think of washing ourselves every day. When the men do not 
work, they are punished; and three of the prisoners were beaten by the second 
lieutenant P. Shoes and socks are torn; shall we receive new ones? Our bodies 
are tortured by lice, against which we have no means of defense. It is really 
true that our treatment must be modified, otherwise we will all be sick. Trust- 
ing in God and in our emperor we expect the dawn of the return to our loved 
ones." 

A professor writes to a newspaper on April 10, 1916: 

"I wish to add that the physician of the German colony of C, who had 
petitioned four times for permission to practice his profession in the prisoners' 
camp, had his petition returned to him three times with the comment: "Inso- 
lent;" the fourth time a singular punishment was inflicted on him, viz.: to 
clean out the privies of the prisoners' camp for 14 days; and the remark was 
added that such an occupation might be more adapted to his profession than 
to cut wood." 

A prisoner of war writes from Tunis on May 3, 1915: 

"Since we departed from K., we are camped in tents in the midst of the 
eolony of Tunis and exposed to all kinds of weather. We suffer much from 
the heat, and receive very little drinking water. We also suffer considerably 
from vermin, and have no opportunity for making our toilet. The transport 
consisted of 200 men, and all had been wounded; there are still some with open 

82 



wounds, with lame limbs or shortened legs; so that even the French physicians 
declined all responsibility for the transport. We are compelled to labor; the 
building of a road is planned, for which the payment is four sous (4 cents) per 
man. Punishments are inflicted for poor work. We are watched over by the 
convict colony, and the leader is extremely severe with us. To us are applied 
the well known penalties of the foreign legion. Apparently the French forget 
that we are prisoners of war and not convicts. For seven weeks we have 
received no more packages; and if some did arrive, things like chocolates, 
cakes, etc., were taken out. So far 650 packages for this transport are miss- 
ing." 

A German lady received from a Frenchman in Morocco (who found a post 
card with her picture and address sent to her bridegroom), the following: letter 
of March 9, 1915: 

"Tour beloved will die here in B., the dirty German, as you all are, filthy 
brood. I will see to it that the mosquitoes eat him up. You have abused long 
enough women, children and old men; now it is our turn to avenge them. . ." 
(Further obscenities cannot be reproduced.) 

With this document of a high civilization demonstrating French chivalry 
towards unarmed German prisoners we conclude our selection. Hundreds of 
similar missives are still extant; and how many perhaps were discovered by 
the censor and destroyed, so that they could not reach Germany. 

Appendix V, 6. 

The Dutch merchant, Victor Schmler, a Catholic, living in Bruges, has tes- 
tified to the following on the "cultural" deeds of the colored warriors, who 
fought on the side of the Frenches* 

"After I was liberated, I stopped at Koxyde and Ostduinkerke for about 
four weeks. There I met, among others sitting around the fire in the dunes, 
Moroccans. They were Gommiers, absolutely black, wearing turbans. In the 
course of the conversation I started with them, I asked if they had already 
been at the front and shot at the Germans. One of them answered: 'Oh, yes.' 
Then he stooped and drew from his wide baggy trousers a string with ill- 
smelling pieces of flesh. He spread out the string and counted the numbers 
of pieces. They were, as I saw, white human ears. Altogether, there were 
twenty-three of them. In connection therewith he stated explicitly that he had 
cut them off from wounded Germans. It was a most horrifying and gruesome 
sight. 

"Another, as a proof of his bravery, also produced from his baggy trous- 
ers, a man's head, which he took in his hand and held out to me. The eyes 
were closed and full of sand. The head was beardless and red-haired. Then 
the black again put the head in his trousers and, afterwards, as he walked, I 
could see that head swinging about the back of his knee. The sons of driver 
Woet, also drivers themselves, can bear witness to this occurrence. They both 
are from Ghent. There were no officers in the vicinity, but it cannot be doubted 
that the officers must be aware of such barbarities and beastliness; in fact, 
it is quite self-evident, for It was known among the entire civilian popula- 
tion." 

The same witness speaks of the Belgian and French armies as follows;iS5 

"I saw that the Belgian army, as well as the French, acted like Huns. If 
one considers that the members of these armies claim to belong to civilized 
states, one can only say that they have acted worse than the Huns. Almost 
all nouses and villas left by their owners have been robbed and plundered. 
Within them there reigns indescribable filth and chaos. . . . It is impos- 
sible to give more specific details. One could talk and write about it for days. 

"I was present when, in the 'Grand Hotel de la Plage' in Nieuport-Bains, 
a cellar was emptied by Belgian soldiers. One of the men, who was unable to 
open a champagne bottle, angry at his failure, threw it into the mirror, which, 
of course, was shattered. One night, a small group of houses between Woel- 
pen and Ramskapelle was to be evacuated. A woman begged the Belgian sol- 
diers commanding there, to he permitted to get her earrings and jewelry. 
This was refused. When the woman returned the next day, everything was 
broken open and looted. I found her weeping in the street. Others also 
told me that the Belgian soldiers had unanimously stated: 'If we do not take 
everything that we can, the French will, and if the Belgians and the French 
do not take it, then the Germans would get it.' 

"I was in the district in question for twenty-seven days all told." 



134 in Grasdroff, p. 88, 87. 

135 ib., p. 87. 



83 



VI. FRANCE AND THE CATHOLIC CHURCH. 
A) The French Charges. 

Book and album purpose to draw two pictures. The first is to depict 
the attitude of Germany and her army, and the second, that of France and 
her army to the Catholic Church. We have already discussed the misrepre- 
sentation of the former attitude in the French book. We shall now in- 
vestigate the second picture in as far as it contains attacks on Germany 
and the German army. 

First of all, it is rather strange that everything blameworthy in France 
should have its origin in Germany, which is even made out as having 
originated the fight of the French Government against the Catholic Church. 
"Bismarck had the diabolical thought of transplanting the Kulturkampf to 
France after it had come to a finish in Germany. He succeeded only too 
well. After having inoculated into our body politic that virus which has 
poisoned and disfigured us, virtuous Germany appeals to the Catholics of 
Italy, Spain and other lands, piously pointing her finger at us and saying: 
'Look at those atheists and degenerates! What can the Church expect from 
them in the future? But we . . . God with us!'"i36 

The expressions of vain glory which pervade the French pages are 
repulsive. Bishop Gibier of Versailles, formerly pastor of S. Paterne at 
Orleans, holds that "tbe French are the chosen people of God, the friends of 
Christ, the true and faithful servants of Holy Church,"i37 that nine-tenths 
of the French soldiers prayiss that God "needs France !"139 

Contempt of German Catholicism runs parallel with that vain glory. 
"In fact, Bismarck's Kulturkampf has borne better fruit than people 
generally think. Its purpose was to nationalize German Catholicism by 
separating it from Rome, so that it might become a docile tool in the hands 
of the Emperor and the Empire. The means have failed, but the end has 
in a manner been attained."i40 To prove this assertion Catholics too are 
said to "have succumbed to that Germanic delirium (delirium germanicum) 
which has affected the whole German nation." More naive, though no less 
implacable, is the same missionary when he gets excited over the German 
expression "Our God." That appears to him as if Germany, "because govern- 
ment on earth is no longer sufficient to her, aspires to dominate Heavens."i4i 

And then even the infidel Turks are allied to Germany! That fact 
alone dooms her to defeat. How gloriously different is the other side! 
France is the champion of Catholicism, England will reform, too, and 
Russia, — well, one cannot praise Russia altogether, but on the whole "Chris- 
tian Russia stands higher in the judgment of God and for the eternal 
salvation of souls than Mohammedan Turkey and Lutheran Germany."i42 

But is is not enough to depreciate German Catholicism. Even episcopal 
pastorals contain the worst kind of condemnations which are neither true 
nor just. Archbishop Mignot of Albi in his war-letter quotes from the 
"Temps" more than two closely printed pages of supposed German war atroci- 



136 B. 48. 

137 B. 278. 

138 B. 278. 

139 B. 277. 

140 B. 49: "An fond, le Kulturkampf a eu plus de succfis qu'on ne le pense commune- 
ment. Son but etalt de nationaliser le cathollcisme allemand, en le detachant de Rome pour 
en falre un Instrument docile a l'usage de l'empereur et de l'emplre. Le moyen a echoue, 
mals le rgsultat a 6t6, ft sa mani&re, obtenn." 

141 B. 52. 

142 B. 78. 

143 B. 272. 

84 



ties. According to him, the Germans are typical barbarians who set might 
before right, "whose minds and hearts are corrupt through lies"i43 and "who 
try to deceive the whole world."i44 

Much needless dust is raised because of the "songs of hatred" composed 
by a few individual Germans, which have been universally disavowed in 
Germany. In his war-epistle, the Archbishop quotes the 108th Psalm with its 
imprecations, not all of which, however, he wishes to be fulfilled in the case 
of Germany. But suddenly he repents of his conciliatory sentiments and 
asks: "Why should we not declare anathema on those Teutonic robbers 
which they so richly deserve ?"145 

Bishop Gibier of Versailles declares: "How can Holy Church fulfil its 
task with reference to such a nation which only believes in brutal force and 
follows mechanically the lead and impulse of its false intellectuals? No, 
Lutheran and Prussianized Germany is not and cannot be in this world the 
helpmate and apostle of Christian civilization."i46 

B) The German Answer. 

THE album pictorially represents the attitude of the French army toward 
the Catholic Church. There are 27 pages of pictures showing burned 
and demolished churches and damaged articles of ecclesiastical use and 
shelled hospitals, in order to show the German attitude. Then five pages of 
pleasant illustrations follow: A clergyman in the midst of French officers 
and soldiers; a military funeral at the front; Masses said in the trenches; 
blessing of the graves of the fallen, etc. Most theatrical are the two illus- 
trations with the appended text saying that "French soldiers, instead of 
smashing crucifixes and demolishing churches, pray to Christ before the 
battle, and give Him thanks after the victory."i47 The mad notion is to be 
conveyed thereby as if the only relations of the German soldier with God 
consist in destroying churches and smashing crucifixes. Our French brethren 
should not entertain the thought that that sort of illustration is apt to 
impress anyone. The pictures are a gross insult to the intelligence of the 
reader. Even the simplest-minded must feel that it would be easy enough 
for German troops to take thousands of similar snapshots, aye, that the 
latter are undoubtedly far more religious than the French. 

One illustration is directly droll and comic. It represents Poincare and 
Millerand, the President of the Republic and the Minister of War, speaking 
to two French clergymen at Belfort.i48 The picture evidently is intended to 
impress people that those two statesmen too have remained loyal to the 
Catholic Church. It can hardly be expected that it will succeed, see- 
ing how reluctant the military authorities were to admit volunteer field 
chaplains to the front, and remembering how Count de Mun at last attained 
tkat object. There were French hospitals in which religious pictures, rosaries 
and medals were not allowed to be distributed among the wounded, absolute 
neutrality of the State in religious things being given as the reason. The 
Government declined the proposal made by Cardinal Sevin, Archbishop of 
Lyons, to establish "national prayers in the name of France and for France," 
in spite of 180,000 signatures. There is even a worse case which Maurice 
Barres, the well-known nationalist, communicates: A woman, mother of 
five children, whose husband had been called to the colors, had to subsist on 
an insufficient government allowance. When she needed shoes for her 
little ones, she went to the bureau where shoes are given away to needy school 
ckildren. But she did not get any because her children attended the Catholic 
parochial school instead of the State school n^ That is "Kulturkampf" even 
in the midst of war, and waged against those who share in its burdens and 
who must be ready at any moment to sacrifice their lives for their country. 



144 B. 273. 

145 B. 276. 

146 B. 278. 

147 A. 30. 

148 A. 31. 

149 "Figaro," October 24, 1914. 



85 



And that is not an isolated case, but rather typical of France. If one is 
acquainted with all that, the above-mentioned picture in the French book can 
only be considered self-deception. 

Nor do the Germans rely on what Bishop Gibier of Versailles says, that 
90 per cent of the French soldiers are religious and say their prayers. 
Experiences with French prisoners of war in Germany invite our contradic- 
tion. 150 in some places a little more than 50 per cent, attend Mass on 
Sunday. But in very many places 90 per cent, or even more are absent. 
Vast numbers never received the Sacraments for many years, and did 
not even go to confession before marching out to war. Let us joyfully 
acknowledge that some French soldiers, on being made prisoners of war, 
rejoined the Church from which they had turned away ever since their 
first communion. It is only reasonable to infer that religious conditions are 
similar among the soldiers at the front. So the statements made in the 
pastoral cannot be true. The hopeful Bishop is deceiving himself. But 
such is the mental disposition of many Frenchmen. They cannot see their 
own faults, and try to minimize them in the face of grave and substantial 
facts: "The re-converted men had not been to confession since their first 
communion or since their wedding day. But that was not the ordinary 
irreligious spirit, it was mere negligence which gradually led to religious 
indifference," thus a priest attached to the army says in the book itself.isi 

Nor is it true that the soldier-priest is everywhere respected and wel- 
comed by the men in the French army.152 Many do not take any notice of 
him. Blasphemy and obscene talk are often indulged in in his presence. 
There is no respect for the priest's cassock. On the other hand, the "bar- 
barians" and the Emperor protect the French priests. In the Senne camp 
the French soldier-priests who minister to the spiritual needs of the men 
now stay at the officers' barracks, and wear the soutane. Others live in the 
Franciscan monastery in the town. Thus they escaped many an unpleasant 
experience to which they would have been exposed on the part of the other 
French prisoners of war. A Trappist brother wrote to his Superior: "Every 
day I go to work together with the other cultivators of the soil. I have 
not asked for that work, but it was done by French sergeants who wanted 
to make fun of me because of my being a Trappist. "163 

Great things are expected from the conversions but the expectations 
might not all be fulfilled. In France, the moral foundation of the nation 
has long been undermined and run into silt. The Catholic faith does not 
thrive in such silt. For decades, prudent France has taken the fleeting 
things of this earth more to heart than the everlasting truths of religion. 
France was possessed by the "fear of the child." In order to make life 
easy for one or two children savings were invested in Russian stock. If 
not all signs are deceiving us, many millions have been lost. Instead of 
saving for their child French parents have saved for Russia. Thus the 
world's history avenges the sins against God's holy commandment. The 
voluntary restriction of children rendered France more and more impotent 
against Germany. Because she would not renounce her desire of revenge 
she had to find allies. And now she herself is forced to sacrifice the lives 
of French citizens, while England lets mercenaries fight her battles. France 
sheds her life blood for British interests. That is the second instance where 
God punishes the offenses against His holy commandment. The mothers in 
France shrank from the pains and labors and troubles caused by children; 
and today they mourn the loss of their "only" sons. That is the third 
instance where Nemesis claims atonement. After the war, French bishops 
may take the opportunity to point, in their pastorals, to that gaping wound 
in the body politic of France. There the bitterest foe is to be found. "Thy 
ruin cometh out of Thy own self." A nation that sins so grievously against 



150 cf. Appendices. 

151 B. 160. 

152 A. 31 and B. 58 



153 "je vais au travail tous les Jours, arec les autres cultlvatenrs du camp. Ce n'est pas 
qui al demands, mals de» sergeants franoais pour se moquer de moi parce que j etals 

86 



mol 
trapplste." 



matrimony and the Sixth Commandment, which protects the child, is not 
easily converted to Catholicism in its fullness and force. 

The tendency to trace to Germany whatever is bad and reprehensible 
in France is morbid. It is quite true that germs of modernism may be 
found in Kant. But why is it that modernism was allowed to spread in 
France to such an alarming extent, whilst the German Catholics were hardly 
affected by it? To claim that even the combat against the Church was 
transferred to France by Prince Bismarck is an absurdity. "Kulturkampf" 
is no article of export. Besides, Bismarck would have been the last man to 
make things palatable for France. And again, it is hardly flattering to the 
French to regard them as stupid enough to take from Bismarck's hand 
the worst poison and swallow it without looking. The misinterpretation 
of our German expression "The Old God" or "Our God" has been almost 
ridden to death. Most Germans hold that every occurrence in the lives of 
individuals and in the history of nations is not merely human work, but 
subject to divine guidance, and that all things are subservient to God's 
providence and dispensation in the end. It is a truly Christian conception 
that the growth and development of the German nation, and the rise to its 
present glory are not merely achievements of German intellect and strength 
but that God has helped the Germans, and therefore that they should give 
thanks to him. They hope and trust that the "old God," who has graciously 
led them so far will also be their guide and help in the future, so that from 
the precious gifts bestowed upon them they may derive sacred duties to be 
carried out under His guidance and according to His divine intentions. That 
"God of the Germans" is the same "old God" who guides the other nations. 
There is only one true God, not a special national God of the Germans. 

It is another false notion that the Kulturkampf has nationalized German 
Catholicism, and thereby attained its object. Long before Bismarck's 
time, German Catholics fostered national sentiments which were severely 
tested by the Kulturkampf. But the Catholics stood the test, and remained 
truly national. 

And surely it is not a crime for a Catholic to be national. On the contrary 
it is his moral duty to be national and patriotic. Therefore, no German 
Catholic feels offended if Catholics of other countries are national, too. But 
there is a wide difference between national and nationalist. National senti- 
ments may be carried to an extreme and become disastrous. In that case 
everything, even Catholicism, is sacrificed to the nationalist principle. Many 
French Catholics, including the authors of the book which we refute, have 
distorted the national idea in that sense. There is no other explanation for 
the fact that they distort everything German and hate us with a blind rage. 
Even the pastorals of bishops teem with unjust attacks and insults to Ger- 
mans. We realize the fact that the bishops in the dioceses which the Germans 
have occupied must pour some healing balm into the burning wounds of 
their dutiful parishioners, but they use wrong methods. They increase and 
stir up feelings of hatred, and their words do not carry consolation into the 
desolate homes, because they do not endeavor to overcome sentiments of 
revenge by love. They even tampered with the papal document so full of 
love and sadness, so noble and beneficent by its impartial tone. They gave 
a nationalist interpretation to various passages in that document, and printed 
them in italics. But even as it stands in the French book the papal 
document is like an innocent lamb among howling wolves. Nationalism was 
the fruitful source of sermons of hatred that were preached against Germany 
from the pulpit. A suspended priest, Wetterle, who has betrayed his country, 
is allowed to incite the people against Germany from French pulpits. A 
positive blasphemy was the Belgian doxology which the most celebrated 
preacher in France recited in the presence of Cardinal Amette at Notre 
Dame de Paris amidst the applause of the congregation. 

It would be a matter of great satisfaction to German Catholics if the 
religious hopes of their French co-religionists were fully realized. But they 
know that two of the most important elements which help to confirm a man's 
philosophy of life are wanting among the French Catholics. Where there is 
freedom of the press, and where the Catholic faith is constantly exposed to 

87 



doubt and unbelief, we need a firm press and above all Catbolic schools. 
French Catholics are without either. If they fail to use those two means, 
their hopes for the future will not be realized. 

French Catholicism is like a sick man. Bruised and broken by the 
French Government which French citizens have elected, it bleeds from a 
thousand wounds. Its priests are isolated in the churches of the country. 
The churches themselves fall to decay, so that even Barres, the sceptic, feels 
touched to the heart. In most schools the children grow up without God and 
religion. In a session of the Chamber, Viviani could boast that the "lights 
of heaven are extinguished." There is soreness and sickness to the very 
marrow of the bone, in Church and State, among families and individuals. 
And those whose calling it is to heal France are blind and do not see their 
own misery, but raise threatening fists against an imaginary foe. 

APPENDICES TO VI. 

The appendices contain extracts from official reports of ecclesiastics hav- 
ing spiritual care of the prisoners of war. Most of the reports read about like 
the following: 

Appendix VI, 1. 

May 2, 1915. 
"About 120 French miners have been employed for several weeks In the 
mine Tremonia, located in the Holy Cross parish. To my question whether 
they were Catholics nearly all answered that they were free-thinkers. For 
almost two hours I argued with them to induce them to assist at the services 
arranged in the church of Dorstfeld for them and for the prisoners of the mine 
Dorstfeld. I begged them to go at least out of curiosity. On the first Sunday 
there appeared 35; on the second Sunday those of the mine Tremonia were 
absent. When I called there the officers on duty told me that only ten vol- 
unteered to go, and that number seemed to him too small. To a French 
master-miner, who still holds dear his religion, I expressed my surprise over 
the conduct cf his countrymen. He replied, that nothing was to be done with 
the men; they did not want to hear of religion. As I master the French lan- 
guage, I propose to renew my visits frequently, but I doubt that I will accom- 
plish anything." 

Appendix VI, 2. 

May 26, 1915. 
"Since the middle of March there are in this parish 50 prisoners of war, 
46 French and four Belgians; all fifty are Catholics. Every second Sunday 
there is service for them with an instruction in French during Mass. On 
Easter eight of the prisoners went to the Sacraments; the others, unfortu- 
nately, could not be induced to it." 

Appendix VI, 3. 

May 27, 1915. 
"At the beginning of April there were here fifty prisoners, for whom I said 
a special mass, because the military authorities would not allow other arrange- 
ments. In spite of pressing invitations only from seven to ten men came. 
Gradually the number of prisoners grew to about 200, to whom, most likely, 
will be added 200 more, as soon as the barracks are completed. About forty 
came to the services. On two different occasions opportunity was given to them 
to go to confession. A Father from Oeventrop came for that purpose. Unfor- 
tunately only nineteen presented themselves. Most of them are infidels, and 
have not received the Sacraments since their first communion; one never 
received them. We have distributed good books amongst them, such as: Le 
bon soldat, etc., and from time to time we shall give them opportunity to 
receive the Sacraments. 



88 



VII. THE RESULTS OF THE WAR AND CATHOLICISM. 

A) The French Charges. 

The result of the sanguinary struggle must affect the Catholic Church. 
The charges preferred in the French book turn to fear of a German victory. 
The French authors clearly recognize that there are more and greater issues 
in this war than territorial acquisition, political preponderance and economic 
victory. Says Monsieur Gaudeau: "My attitude to the militant atheism in 
France is not effeminate and passive. But on my honor and my priestly 
conscience I declare with a conviction which a long life of study has matured 
that Germany lies when she tries to persuade Catholics in neutral lands 
that her victory will be a triumph of religion and order, while the triumph 
of France would be a victory of unbelief and anarchy. Germany lies; the 
real enemies of Holy Church, the enemies of Christ and God, the 'viri obscuri' 
who have knowledge and yet work in the dark, all these side with Ger- 
many."!^ To prove this Gaudeau appeals to Goyau's equation, "Protest- 
antism-Germanism." Goyau, too, holds that German thought is essentially 
anti-Catholic, nay, anti-religious, German Catholics, he says, cannot effectively 
oppose the resistless wave of agnostic Germanism. They are kept under that 
strong anti-religious current, aye, carried away and swallowed up by that 
mighty flood in politics, social life and science. France and her Allies have 
actually resumed the work of the Crusades in the East. Gaudeau sums up 
with the words of Joan of Arc: "To war against France is to war against 
God! "155 

The same thought often recurs. Germany's aspirations are overlordship 
of Europe, and even universal dominion. The fruit of a German victory 
would be to bring into German service Austria, Luxemburg, Belgium and 
Holland, Switzerland and the three Scandinavias, as well as part of France. 
German might is German right! Germany would subjugate the whole world. 
Her victory would be a triumph of Lutherdom and Islam. But the victory 
of France and her allies would be a triumph for Catholicism. In that case. 
German "Kultur" would be ousted by the Graeco-Latin civilization, which 
Christianity has permeated and crowned with a halo of glory. The Eastern 
question would be solved, and the Cross would soon replace the crescent in 
the Hagia Sofia at Constantinople. Jerusalem would become free, and the 
Balkan nations might live in amity and peace. The liberty of the Catholic 
religion would be proclaimed wherever Slav nationalities dwell. 

Even the Roman question would find an adequate solution. The French 
people would heave a sigh of relief because they would be freed from the 
yoke and pressure of their formidable neighbor: Germany was always an 
insolent threat in the face of France. Peace within would be restored, 
there would be no more domestic upheavals and revolutions in France. 
Permanent peace and happiness would prevail.156 

B) The German Answer. 

'OBODY can foretell with certainty what the results of the war will be. 
All arguments concerning the effects of the war in their relation to 
the Catholic Church are at present preliminary inferences drawn from 
facts known so far and from the presumption of victory for the one or the other 
side. Uncertainty regarding the final results must exist even for this reason 



154 B. 281. 

155 B. 30. 

158 Cf. B. 76-8". 



89 



that no one can tell how complete the victory will be, nor what the condition 
of the victor's strength. French Catholics say that it is a war of religion 
waged by German Kultur against the Catholic Church. Kultur, of course, in 
the eyes of those gentlemen, is anti-Catholic, anti-Christian and anti-religious. 
They do not take into account the large number of Catholics who fight under 
the flags of Germany and Austria-Hungary. These 65,000,000 men, to large 
numbers of whom the Catholic religion is a living faith, would hardly have 
gone to war with such fervent enthusiasm if they were convinced that it 
was a war against the Catholic Church. On the other hand, the Allies com- 
prise schismatic Russians and Protestant Englishmen, who would certainly 
not put in all their strength, and sacrifice their blood and property if every- 
thing, in the end, would simply turn out in favor of the Catholic Church. 
The whole problem has been presented in a wrong light. In the first place, 
the war is not a war of religion, more particularly not a war between 
Catholicism and the forces opposed to Christianity. A passing glance upon 
the two groups of belligerents brings that fact back to mind. 

It would be wrong, however, to say that religion is not concerned at all in 
this war. In this connection a singular observation may be pointed out. In 
neutral countries all those groups that are attached to Catholicism are really 
neutral and even pro-German. On the other hand, non-Catholic circles (ex- 
cepting those who are of German birth), and above all nominal Catholics 
who are perfectly indifferent to their religion, are the bitterest enemies of 
Germany. If the argument of the French Catholics were correct, Protestant 
Holland and Scandinavia would openly side with Germany. But the contrary 
is the case. The serious Catholic newspapers all favor Germany, the other 
section of the press the Allies. 

Thus it is in South America, Spain and Switzerland, and thus it was 
in Italy before she broke her pledged word and entered the war. All 
practical Catholics in Italy were opposed to the war to the last moment, and 
were well disposed towards Germany. This observation suggests a different 
solution. The declared enemies of the Church in all nations have made 
common cause against Germany. Above all, the Freemasons, who are polit- 
ically so powerful in all Latin countries, have endeavored to let loose the 
furies of the war. All those who took a stand against the Catholic Church 
in the Ferrer affair years ago, again appear in the opposite camp today. 
They are opposed to any form of Christianity and not merely to the Catholic 
Church, and that is where their unity sets in. Only recently the German 
lodges have detached themselves from the Freemasons of Southern Europe. 
The latter fight against three things which draw strength from the Central 
Powers. They fight against the Christian idea, the monarchial form of gov- 
ernment, and particularly against the Pope. But the Central Powers are rep- 
resented at the Papal Court. Their constitutioc is monarchial, their princes 
not being mere shadows, and German-speaking nations are pervaded by the 
Christian spirit. 

The Catholic Nationalists of France are undoubtedly largely responsible 
for the war. They throw in their lot with the anti-clerical party, which is 
the real instigator of the war. Its object is to crush Catholicism, and not to 
strengthen it. If France and her allies triumphed what would be the fate 
of the Catholic Church? Germany's defeat would be a victory for Russia, 
England, France, and now also for Italy. What attitude then would these 
Powers take towards the Catholic Church?i57 

Everybody knows what to expect from Russia for the Catholic Church. 
Russia and the Holy See have so far been almost in a state of war. The 
history of the Muscovite Empire is abundant in Catholic persecutions, and 
the Orthodox State Church is the religious ideal of Russia. Under the 
pressure of modern currents of thought the Czar has indeed proclaimed 
religious liberty, which decree, however, hitherto has not been carried 
out. When the Russian armies victoriously entered Galicia, propaganda 
was immediately made in favor of the Orthodox Church, and Russian priests 
were sent into the occupied territory. A Russian victory would be a hard 



167 Cfr. Schroers, Der Krleg und der Kathollzismus, Kempien und Muenchen, Eoeeel 1935. 

90 



blow at the Catholic Church; all the more so since Russian power over 
the Balkan Slavs would increase. Russia would certainly use her influence 
and work in the Balkan countries against Rome. 

For centuries, the British Empire has been fiercely anti-Catholic. Even 
today the "no-popery" cry is heard broadcast throughout the bigoted country. 
Only recently when the fight for Home Rule in Ireland brought the country 
to the verge of civil war, the religious strife of old was revived. How hard 
it is to England's pride to do justice to Catholic Ireland, the martyr of the 
Catholic faith! The Catholics in England will not have to suffer fresh 
persecutions from their Protestant countrymen, but an English victory will 
certainly not help the Catholic cause. In the course of the war England 
sent a Minister to the Vatican, but merely for political reasons and political 
purposes. The English press bitterly complained that the Pope did not join 
in the outbursts of hatred in which the Allies indulge and that the "Clerical" 
press of Italy (led by the Osservatore Romano and the Corriere d'ltalia) 
were enthusiastically "pro-German." But since Italy has joined the ranks 
of Germany's enemies England will be a negligible quantity as regards the 
regulation of the Roman question according to Papal wishes, because England 
must avoid a friction or breach with Italy. 

And what about France? Her victory would consolidate the present 
Government for a long time to come. "It has thrown down hated Germany, 
has reconquered the old French prestige in Europe, has quenched the national 
thirst of revenge, and restored the military glory which is indispensable to 
Gallic pride. Party-torn France will join in unanimous admiration for and 
gratitude to the present regime."i58 

Such would be the position of the present French Government if the 
Triple Alliance were to be victorious. But French Catholicism would, in- 
deed, fall on evil days. Hitherto anti-clericalism has been characteristic of 
the present French Government. Bitter enemies of the Church and Atheists, 
led by the radical French Freemasons, have fettered Catholic vitality in 
France. Religious teaching has been banished from all schools and most 
teachers are anti-clerical. The name of God is no longer tolerated in school- 
books. The State has confiscated the churches, vicarages, episcopal semi- 
naries and bishops' residences. The budget for public worship by which up 
to the time of separation of Church and State a small indemnity was granted 
for the church-property confiscated in the Revolution, is suppressed. The re- 
ligious orders have been expelled from the country, and their property has 
been confiscated. Catholic priests are starving in France and must make a 
living of some sort. Chaplains in the army and navy were discharged and 
have been re-admitted in but small numbers at the beginning of the war. 
Even the Sisters of Mercy had to give up their work and leave the land. 
Priests gain admittance to hospitals on condition only that the patients 
expressly request it. No Crucifix, no religious symbol whatever, is permitted 
in schoolrooms, in the courts of justice and in public places. Religious 
processions and festivals that are celebrated in the open are strictly for- 
bidden. The priests must serve in the army as soldiers. In hospitals, medals, 
rosaries, or religious pictures must not be distributed among the wounded 
soldiers. The law which separated Church and State even attempted to 
change the Catholic constitution by rendering the Catholic Church in France 
schismatic and severing it from Rome. During the first three centuries of 
cruel Christian persecutions no Roman Emperor so systematically per- 
secuted and oppressed the Christian religion as the present atheistic Govern- 
ment of the French Republic. 

Those conditions would become permanent. "The rulers who have laid 
the power of the Church low will live, personally and politically, on the 
hatred of Church and religion. Crowned with the laurel of victory, their 
persecution will be more cruel still, and the country, dazzled by their splendid 
successes, will follow their lead. The radicals want to abolish the freedom of 
Catholic instruction, and to make the atheistic state-school compulsory . . . 
Who doubts that the republican tyrants, raised to the highest power by 



158 Sohroers, Ibid., p. 17. 

91 



military triumph, will make such attempts, and that the Deputies, elected by 
the pressure of the Government, will uphold them. Catholics would then 
have to drink the cup of bitterness to the dregs."i59 

It is similar with Italian Catholicism, since that country stabbed its 
former allies in the back. 

As stated above, that breach of faith is due to the enemies of the 
Church, especially to Freemasonry. A victory would give tremendous im- 
petus and strength to the instigators of Italy's participation in the war. 
But alas! Italian Freemasonry never has been particular in the choice of 
its means when warring against the Church. Italian Catholicism and the 
Pope himself would at once perceive the increased power of Freemasonry. 

Catholic hearts are dismayed at the thought of what is in store for the 
Holy Father. Pope Benedict has remained in Rome. The Ministers accred- 
ited by the Central Powers to the Vatican have left and made abode at 
Lugano. The German ecclesiastics, though protected by the Law of Guar- 
antees, have likewise left, because the Pope himself advised them to do so. 
The Supreme Pontiff still towers like a mighty rock in a surging and storm- 
swept sea. No one dares to predict what the future will reveal. 

Would the victory of the Allies solve the Roman Question in accordance 
with the Papal dignity? A victorious Italy would make no concessions to 
the Papacy. France has had a diplomatic rupture with the Vatican since 
Church and State were severed. Russia does not worry about Rome, and 
would welcome its enfeeblement. England merely sent a legate to Rome 
with a political and selfish end in view. The entry of Italy among the 
belligerents has complicated conditions even more because the Roman ques- 
tion can be solved by the Allies only in accordance with their confederate. 
The German Catholics, in their annual convention, have demanded that the 
Holy Father have full liberty in exercising the Supreme Pontificate. The 
development of political conditions in Rome at the present time has justified 
that claim. German States and Austria have diplomatic relations with the 
Holy See on the basis of political and juridical principles. It cannot be 
indifferent to them that the Pope is deprived of all outward means to safe- 
guard his holy office. 

Catholicism has to fear nothing and to hope much from a victory of 
Germany and Austria. Conflict and strife will be its lot in the future as 
in the past. In all countries, and not only in Germany, there are intellectual 
currents of an anti-Christian nature which the French book tries to represent 
as typically German. But German Catholics have been good at defending 
their holy faith in the intellectual contests of the past. They shall be 
wanting even less after the war. Many a one who formerly was animated 
by anti-Catholic feelings, will be of a different disposition after the war. 
Above all, the German Catholics trust that the Government of the country 
will not in the least take part in a warfare against the Church. The lessons 
of the "Kulturkampf" are not forgotten: Vestigia terrent. As to its inner 
development, German Catholicism has made splendid progress. On all sides 
there is keen Catholic activity. German sense of organization has achieved 
its most conspicuous results in the realm of German Catholicism. The 
German Catholics therefore are fully conscious of their strength and are 
ready to defend their religion against any and all attacks. None is worthy 
of life and liberty but he who acquires them every day anew and knows how 
to defend them if need be. The German Catholics trust in the living God 
and in their own strength. They do not seek the conflict, but neither do 
they fear it, and they view the future calmly. 



159 Ibid., pp. 18, 19. 

92 



VIII. CONCLUSION. 

RESUME of the preceding analysis shows that the French book and 
album purpose to create the impression on the reader that Germany 
is hostile to religion and Catholicism, whereas France is the refuge 
for both. The colors are mixed accordingly. Book and album present hor- 
rible pictures whenever they want to show up Germany in her alleged 
hatred of religion and of the Catholic Church. Anything which is open to 
attack, even in the slightest degree, is seized upon gratefully and greedily, 
everything else is passed over. But when France is to be depicted, the 
landscape is sunny and serene. Peaceful and attractive pictures are pre- 
sented. Everything that is in any way defective is either eliminated or 
glossed over with the light hue of palliation. 

The aspect of both pictures is utterly wrong. Germany is represented 
as a devil of darkness and France as an angel of light. Neither is true. 

Germany is slandered unjustly. National passion has outraged truth. 
It represents Germany as having prepared a frivolous war of aggression for 
many years, and of having groundlessly and unjustly attacked her peace- 
loving neighbors at a favorable opportunity, whereas she was in reality 
forced into war and must defend herself. National passion accuses Germany, 
who crossed the Belgian frontier in justified self-defence, of the breach of 
Belgian neutrality, although this certainly has not existed since 1906, and 
France and England were for their part ready to enter Belgium. It accuses 
Germany of atrocities in her methods of warfare, which have by no means 
been established as facts. It makes use of indicting pamphlets which have 
been proven to contain false assertions. It calls those acts atrocities which 
were only justified defense against the franctireur war. It makes use of 
witnesses who may open their mouths only in accusation; it even calls 
German soldiers as witnesses in quoting parts from their diaries which 
seem able to throw dark shadows on the German methods of warfare, and 
passes over in silence everything that might disseminate a friendly light. 
In doing this it often imputes to German words meanings which they do 
not have; often the text is turned and twisted until it has the desired 
meaning. It has admitted witnesses for the prosecution but none for the 
defence. It denies irritation and grave provocation of the German soldiers 
by the embittered and unlawful franctireur warfare of the Belgian popula- 
tion which, in ignorance of what the Government of the country had done, 
regarded Belgium as a neutral country and, misled by the press which 
trusted blindly and frivolously in the Allies, indulged in the hope that by 
participating in the fighting it might cause the defeat of the German army. 
It has violated the basic principle governing any just proceeding: Audiatur 
et altera pars. 

That in an army of millions there are inferior elements that are 
guilty of excesses is natural and will by no means be denied. But it is un- 
just to place the blame for the actions of a few individuals on the entire 

93 



army, when it is certain that the army leaders are endeavoring with the 
greatest earnestness and energy, to prevent such excesses and to punish 
the guilty ones. 

National passion imputes to Germany a conception of war and civiliza- 
tion which she does not have, and which she rejects. It endeavors to build 
up such conceptions partly from invented or misunderstood individual state- 
ments of events, or by making the entire nation responsible for such 
isolated statements made by irresponsible persons. 

Hatred of the enemy has drawn the picture: it is a caricature. 

France is glorified beyond measure. No shadow darkens the angelic 
picture. Whatever can serve this glorification is seized upon and skillfully 
used, everything else is passed over in silence or is at least lit up by the 
light of understanding and loving apology. 

Vain glory has painted the picture; it is an apotheosis. 

Dispassionate reason will reject both pictures in order to serve truth. 
"Great is the power of truth, and it shall prevail in the end." 




94 



CORRECTION. 

On page 78, note 130, read hiring instead of killing. 



CONTENTS. 

Page 

Foreword to the American Edition 3 

A. Memorial of German Catholics against the French Book: La 

Guerre allemande et le Catholicisme 9 

Telegrams Exchanged between the Emperor and the German Car- 
dinals 16 

B. The False Charges of French Catholics against Germany 17 

I. The Outbreak of the War 22 

II. The Violation of Belgian Neutrality 33 

III. The Method of Warfare 43 

IV. The German "Conception of War" 70 

V. Misrepresentations of German Kultur 74 

VI. France and the Catholic Church 84 

VII. The Results of the War and Catholicism 89 

VIII. Conclusion 93 



